#the meehan institute | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

emmaotoole · 2 years

Text

Beyond books: Digital is great, but many Ottawa library users welcome return of in-person services

The Ottawa Public Library system has more than 30 branches including this one in Carp. [Photo © Kevin Zannese]

Many businesses and services have made the transition to online delivery since the COVID-19 pandemic was declared in March 2020, and the Ottawa Public Library (OPL) was no exception.

But while some library users have been happy with online borrowing, many are keen for in-person activities to return and, eventually, the services that will be offered at the new central location.

Ella Tkachenko has had an OPL library card since she moved to the city in 2014. Two years later she tried the library’s digital services for the first time, and she hasn’t looked back.

Tkachenko says she values the “convenience factor” of digital book borrowing. She frequents the OPL website and remains an active library card holder, yet she hasn’t been to a physical branch since before the pandemic.

Tkachenko also says digital services are important for accessibility. For some, mobility issues are a barrier to visiting physical libraries. Others rely on audio and visual reading aids to access the library’s materials.

Kevin Ulug experiences eye strain that makes it difficult for him to read. He uses his library card to borrow audio books.

Tkachenko and Ulug are not alone in their preference for digital services.

As expected, public library branches experienced a sharp decline in visits in 2020, with numbers dropping nearly 58 per cent from 2019, according to data from Ontario.

[DATA SET PREVIEW UNAVAILABLE]

And while total circulation numbers also dropped significantly, the numbers for electronic material, which had risen steadily between 2015 and 2019, dropped by less than 15 per cent between 2019 and 2020.

[DATA SET PREVIEW UNAVAILABLE]

But even those who are keen on digital borrowing say that the physical spaces are a vital part of a library system.

“The physical part of the library is where I think a lot of community building happens,” said Tkachenko.

She says libraries are “places where people can actively be and where bodies can be present,” without any further expectations. You don’t have to buy a coffee to stay there,” she said.

Nick Fundytus, a library card holder and father of two, says he uses the library’s digital and physical services.

While Fundytus borrows e-books for himself, he and his kids, five and seven, are regulars at their local branch. They borrow material from books to video games and keep an eye out for events, Fundytus says, adding he is a proponent of spaces where the community can gather.

"Even if we have a lot of digital resources, spending money on physical spaces as well reflects what kind of society we are and what kind of city we want to be," said Fundytus.

A space that offers these services, such as community programs, studying spaces and internet access, is sometimes called a “third place.” The term, coined by sociologist Ray Oldenburg, refers to spaces where people can gather outside of their homes and workplaces. These third places can help to level out social classes and backgrounds, according to the Brookings Institution.

The OPL operates more than 30 branches in urban, suburban and rural areas across the city. Many of these locations, such as the Carp branch, have been offering in-person services for decades.

Library users are hopeful that the new central library at LeBreton Flats will greatly expand these services. Ādisōke, a joint facility with Library and Archives Canada, is expected to be finished in 2026. The facility will feature many different spaces, from multi-purpose meeting areas, reading rooms, a café and the OPL Children’s Discovery Centre. This large area will include children’s activities such as hands-on play zones and interactive computer stations. (Some of the spaces have been re-thought because of the pandemic.)

David Brown, assistant to city councillor and OPL board of trustees member Carol Anne Meehan, says he expects the new facility to increase in-person visitation and help promote a strong sense of community.

“A lot of thought has gone into a design that would be open and welcoming,” said Brown. “Getting people into these larger, well-lit, open spaces is going to enhance Ottawa Public Library’s ability to encourage people to come.”

The new facility is being built on the traditional, unceded territory of the Anishinaabe Algonquin Nation. Ādisōke is a word from the Anishinaabemowin language referring to storytelling. Spaces in Ādisōke, such as a wigwam-inspired circular lodge, will be given Anishinaabemowin names as well.

Tkachenko is one of many Ottawa residents excited at the prospect of a new space to gather in the city.

“Something that Ottawa lacks is places where people are able to build communities,” she says, adding that she hopes Ādisōke will provide this.

This was originally published on Capital Current. You can view it here.

#writing

0 notes

gravitascivics · 2 years

Text

JUDGING THE NATURAL RIGHTS VIEW, XIII

An advocate of parochial federalism continues his/her presentation[1] …

This posting serves as the last one to apply Eugene Meehan’s concerns regarding the viability of the political systems model.[2] Those last concerns, predictability and control, and their treatment here serves as a sort of introduction to the methodology that model mostly employs.

In terms of predictability, this systems approach does provide viable predictive insights into the political phenomena it studies. While it was gaining prominence in the 1950s, one can still find among political science researchers its centrality in how they conduct their research. This following description from Tufts University gives one a sense of this role which mostly relies on the model’s predictive power:

The study of political systems and theories represents an essential basis for explaining, understanding, and comparing the units and actors that comprise the world of the early 21st century. As a field, Political Systems and Theories encompasses courses whose focus is alternative theoretical approaches for the conduct of research and analysis about political systems, major forces shaping the emerging world, the nature of international change and continuity, and the basis for theoretical development. The Political Systems and Theories field offers students the opportunity to explore, evaluate, and compare [mid-range] theories about such crucially important phenomena as power, legitimacy, institutions, cooperation, conflict, peace, and war. Conceptually, the field is (or should be) integral to, and an essential prerequisite for, courses that comprise the practical parts of the curriculum. Students taking this field are expected to acquire basic knowledge about the major theories that shape international and comparative politics.[3]

This sort of overview implies a central role being attributed to systems theory by crediting it the central position in the discipline even today.

Why? The results of ensuing studies provide legitimate insights into political behavior. Of course, political science is not a hard science and predictability is highly qualified as is the case in not just political science but in all of the social sciences. For example, Drew Bowlsby, et al. report on such challenges political science research faces when it comes to predictability, so the ability to predict is significantly constrained and can only be considered in relative terms within the social sciences.[4]

The derived findings from this literature of political science, which are deemed of importance to the knowledge of secondary students in preparation to becoming viable citizens, should be included in their curricular studies. It offers the best opportunities in understanding students’ social environments. What people find when looking at corporate practices, for example, is increased reliance on political studies based on this model to make sense of their political realities.[5]

Finally, the question of whether the use of the construct fulfills its purposes as outlined above needs to be addressed. That is, does this construct imply ways of controlling the phenomena in question? This dialectic argument is claiming that, as illustrated over the postings dedicated to this model, the construct penetrates the workings of government and political actors in general, so as to give consumer-citizens enormous insight into governance and politics.

Courses of study which apply this construct have the model serve as foundations or “springboards” by which to identify those aspects of the American political system which citizens need to know in order to have any chance of being effective in pursuing their goals. By emphasizing the realities of the American political conditions, not much time or concerns are diverted into historical aspects that add little to the effectiveness of political actors in the present.

Historical elements are appropriately subsumed under cultural factors that affect current political decision-making behaviors. The construct does not make a priori judgments about any particular political arrangements, and can, therefore, be easily applied in such ways as to render the political arrangements of an individual country – like the US – in neutral fashion, something historical approaches have found difficult to sustain.

If students accept that this nation’s cultural expectations of government are for the respective state to protect its citizens’ rights and to meet the demands of their competing consumer-citizens,[6] the political systems approach serves most completely the purposes of that perspective.

Methodology

The methodology most associated with the political systems approach is the scientific method.[7] Because of the nature of social aspects of political science, strategies of inquiry have been developed which include survey research methods, observations, ethno-methodologies, document study, simulation and games, as well as experiments.

The purpose here, though, is not to review the scientific methodology of the discipline, but rather to describe how this methodology incorporates the political systems approach through classroom use. In that pursuit, a scientific approach is again the most conducive to those teachers so disposed.

That is, by applying the scientific method to the problems associated with teaching practical political information, educators can avail themselves of the most congruent method to deliver the subject matter if that presentation adheres to the political systems approach. Many in the field of social studies – e.g., the main professional organization, the NCSS[8] – has encouraged such instructional options.

The judgment of this dialectic argument is that the method associated with the behavioral learning theories is the truest to the scientific mode since it relies on studying observable human behavior. As related to the systems approach, as described in this account, behavior is the focus of concern:

… behavioral learning theories, [are] explanations for learning that emphasize observable behavior. Behavioral theories emphasize the ways in which pleasurable or painful consequences of behavior change individuals’ behavior over time and ways in which individuals model their behavior on that of others … Behavioral learning theorists try to discover principles of behavior that apply to all living beings …[9]

This concern over classroom instruction will be the initial topic of the next posting. Apart from the dialectic presentation, this blogger believes that nothing has affected civics education since the 1970s more than this shift to the political systems model in arranging its subject matter.

[1] This presentation continues with this posting. The reader is informed that the claims made in this posting do not necessarily reflect the beliefs or knowledge of this blogger. Instead, the posting is a representation of what an advocate of the natural rights view might present. This is done to present a dialectic position of that construct. This series of postings begins with “Judging Natural Rights View, I,” August 2, 2022.

[2] Eugene Meehan in the mid-twentieth century provides the following list of criteria by which one can evaluate or ask questions of any theory, but given its thrust, they seem most applicable to scientifically derived theories. The list is: Comprehension, Power, Precision, Consistency or Reliability, Isomorphism, Compatibility, Predictability, Control. See Eugene J. Meehan, Contemporary Political Thought: A Critical Study (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1967).

[3] “Political Systems & Theories/About the Field,” Fletcher/Tufts University (n.d.), assessed September 11, 2022, https://fletcher.tufts.edu/academics/courses-general-requirements/fields-study/political-systems-theories.

[4] See Drew Bowlsby, Erica Chenoweth, Cullen Hendrix, and Jonathan D. Moyer, “The Future Is a Moving Target: Predicting Political Instability,” Cambridge University Press (February 20, 2019), accessed September 11, 2022, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/abs/future-is-a-moving-target-predicting-political-instability/0028744BE1AFF83F879E7759D798D88A.

[5] For example, Daniel Nyberg, “Corporations, Politics, and Democracy: Corporate Political Activities as Political Corruption,” Organization Theory (January 18, 2021), accessed September 11, 2022, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2631787720982618.

[6] Jeffrey Reiman, “Liberalism and Its Critics,” in The Liberalism-Communitarianism Debate, ed. C. F. Delaney (Lanhan, MD: Rowman and Litttlefield Publishers, Inc., 1994), 19-37.

[7] John G. Gunnell, “Political Theory and Political Science,” in The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought, edited by David Miller, Janet Coleman, William Connolly, and Alan Ryan (Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1987), 386-930 AND Janet Buttolph Johnson, H. T. Reynolds, and Jason D. Mycoff, Political Science Research Methods, 8th Edition (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2015).

[8] National Council for the Social Studies, Preparing Students for College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) (Washington, D. C.: NCSS, 2013), accessed April 16, 2018, https://www.socialstudies.org/c3.

[9] Robert Slavin, Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1994), 265.

#political systems model #predictability #control #political science methods #civics education #social studies

0 notes

lqb2reads · 2 years

Link

0 notes

enthusiasticsobrietyabuse · 2 years

Photo

Dear current staff member,

I wanted to reach out to let you know that you can walk away from the program today.

I assure you nothing I write here is meant to harm or cast judgement on you as an individual; I’ve been in your shoes.

You are not “fucked up” for exploring this message, you have every right to hear this, to ask questions, to challenge your own thinking. I know you don’t think you’re in a cult, I certainly did not when I was there.

This message is for anyone who may be on the fence, who may be having thoughts about getting out, or simply curious about exploring a way out. When I left, I wish someone had sent this message to me. A message of support, and hope.

That you can leave and you will not die. You can leave and you will not relapse or you can leave and choose to drink alcohol. You can leave and you are not broken, you are not spiritually bankrupt, and you can have healthy, meaningful relationships where you set the boundaries of your personal life and the relationships within it, not your boss; which is super weird if you really start to drill down into that one.

You can have unwavering success away from the program, it is not some spiritually superior entity. The leadership tells you that someone like me is just an angry disgruntled former employee who can’t own their life. I’m here to tell you that aside from being a former employee, I am none of those things. I am happy, and free, and successful. I don’t hold a grudge, I don’t feel anger or resentment towards the program. I just remember what it was like for me.

Living in fear of going to purpose, having to share every “insanity” or strange thought I had to large groups of people only for leadership to weaponize that information in order to use it against me later. I made today’s equivalent of $774 per month and was told I was selfish when I asked for a raise.

When you work there, you sort of have to live two lives. There was the image we presented to the world; young, motivated, drug and alcohol counselors who overcame our demons to share this amazing concept of enthusiastic sobriety with the world.

Then there was the other life; the one where we dissected each other’s lives, often in cruel and hurtful ways, where we openly discussed how the white race was superior than other races, where homosexuality was a sickness that could be cured, where women existed to serve men, where we chose our parents at birth to work out specific issues, where being sexually assaulted was somehow our own fault, where engaging in non-spiritual activities opened us up to catastrophic events occurring in our lives, and where western medicine was mostly shunned resulting in heartbreaking outcomes for people who really needed help.

Looking back, it was exhausting. I am who I am today and I cherish not having to pretend anything. When I left, people looked at me like I was broken and I believed them. I was 20 something and had nowhere and no one to go to except for my parents who I had effectively cut out of my life for years. I had no other friends or support, it felt hopeless.

But I took a true leap of faith and landed on my feet. Today I live a life that is not dictated by groupthink, is not influenced by what someone else determines is right for me. I make those calls and I think I do a pretty decent job of it. Please reach out if you need any kind of support.

I know that this time is especially trying for you because of all the negative attention the program is receiving. I imagine leadership is trying to circle the wagons and tamp down any dissent and they’ve probably encouraged you to not read or watch anything regarding the program in the media. I’ve been there too and it’s awful. I completely understand how scary it is to even consider leaving. I was so afraid and terrified because I knew I would be shunned.

When I walked away, it felt like the hardest thing I’d ever done. Everyone on staff immediately stopped talking to me, I heard the whispers about how fucked up I was, that I was destined to be dead and on the streets, that I couldn’t take true ownership of my life, that I was playing the victim, that I was unreachable, unloveable, and spiritually sick.

I’m here to tell you it’s all bullshit. You’re not fucked up, you’re in a cult. And you can just walk away today. You can also take your time and explore this on your own; you are not wrong to refrain from discussing this with anyone there, I’m certain you already know what they’ll say.

Keeping this from them does not make you dishonest or fucked up or wrong or whatever bullshit they tell you. Believing so is what allows them to continue to hold power and exert control over others.

Maybe I’m over simplifying your situation, I get that, but I’m also here if you need anything. There’s an entire network of support you can tap into right now; you can leave today. I wish you the absolute best.

-Former staff member

#bob meehan #clint stonebraker #the insight program #the cornerstone program #the crossroads program #the pathway program #step 2 recovery #the meehan institute #cult #cult survivor #i got out #i see you survivor #breaking code silence #enthusiastic sobriety #enthusiastic sobriety abuse

4 notes · View notes

outoftowninac · 2 years

Text

THE MEANEST MAN IN THE WORLD

1920

The Meanest Man in the World is a three-act play by Augustin MacHugh based on a one-act play by Everett Ruskay. Staged by John Meehan, it was originally produced and starring George M. Cohan.

Despite the title, the play is not another version of Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.

Richard Clarke is a good-natured lawyer who lacks the hard-boiled legal instincts to be financially successful. When the object of his affections, Janie Brown, decides to marry a wealthy suitor, Richard resolves, with the help of cutthroat colleague Frederick Leggitt, to win Janie's heart by making the transformation from nice-guy attorney to ruthless legal shark.

The play premiered at Nixon’s Apollo Theatre on the Boardwalk in Atlantic City NJ on July 26, 1920. From AC to AP (Asbury Park), the play did three nights at the Asbury Park Savoy. Three weeks later, when nothing had been heard from the Man...

The ways of the theatre sometimes baffle even those Identified with it and to an outsider the theatre as an institution is about as mystifying as a heathen Chinee.

Take, for Instance, the case of "The Meanest Man In the World," the George M. Cohan production which had Its premier here this summer, Asbury Park folk flocked to see "The Meanest Man" and liked it, and everybody predicted that It was headed for a sure fire Broadway success. There was surprise, therefore, when Alan Dlnehart, who was the man who converted "The Meanest Man" and made a whole community millionaires, bobbed up Monday night In support of Miss Florence Reed In "The Mirage," the new Selwyn play at the Savoy. So we hunted up the smiling' southern gentleman under whose tutelage we have been all season, and asked him about it.

"No, there's nothing the matter with “The Meanest Man In the World," he said. Mr. Cohan Just hadn't room for it In New York, so it has been taken off and is being recast. Meantime, Mr. Dinehart's salary had to be paid, so he was loaned to the Selwyn for "The Mirage." The southern gentleman also whispered that another star, recently appearing in a premiere at the Savoy, has been withdrawn from that cast and Is being rehearsed for still another play which was presented here this summer before being submitted to Broadway. ~ ASBURY PARK PRESS, SEPTEMBER 15, 1920

Simultaneously, in other publications, Cohan was assuring reporters that the Man was booked for Broadway and in rehearsal. Before the Rialto, Cohan took the play to Hartford.

The play opened on Broadway at the Hudson Theatre (formerly the Savoy Nightclub) on October 12, 1920 and ran 202 performances. Dinehart never returned to the role of Leggitt, which was assumed by Elwood F. Bostick. Coincidentally, Cohan’s leading lady had the same surname as his theatre - Hudson.

Meanwhile, two blocks away, the Broadway theatre named for Cohan hosted three different plays since the Meanest Man began.

On December 22, 1923, a silent film version of the play premiered in Atlantic City at the Virginia Theatre on the Boardwalk starring Burt Lytell and Blanche Sweet.

Two decades later, a remake film starred Jack Benny and Priscilla Lane. The script was extensively re-written to trade on Benny’s radio personae, including creating a role for his sidekick, Rochester and using Benny’s theme tune “Love in Bloom”. The film started screening in Atlantic City at the Strand at the end of February 1943. It was eventually also seen at the Capitol and Rialto Theatres on Atlantic Avenue. Historically speaking, it was the shortest (57 minutes) A film released, which caused scheduling problems with theatres nationwide. Today it is problematic because Benny appears in blackface. Sadly, George M. Cohan died while the film was in production.

#George M. Cohan #The Meanest Man in the World #Broadway #Broadway Play #Theatre #Stage #Atlantic City #Nixon's Apollo Theatre #Jack Benny #Hudson Theatre #Augustin MacHugh #1920

3 notes · View notes

seymour-butz-stuff · 3 years

Link

Candidate characteristics have an important impact on voter choice, and scandals are found to negatively impact a political campaign. Yet the literature, with its focus on scandals such as financial and (consensual) affairs, has failed to look into how allegations of sexual assault and harassment may impact electability. This study analyzes the effect that allegations of sexual assault or harassment have on the electoral success of American politicians. Using an original survey experiment, we find that, on average, American citizens are less likely to support a candidate accused of sexual assault or sexual harassment. However, not all voters do so to the same magnitude. We find that Democrats are significantly less likely to support a candidate that faces such allegations. Republicans do not strongly penalize candidates facing allegations of sexual assault or harassment, especially if the candidate is identified as a Republican. We analyze open-ended survey responses to offer an explanation for such variation: a propensity to disbelieve women who speak out about sexual assault and harassment explains variations in why some voters may not change their opinion of a candidate based on an allegation.

In the last few years, many women in the United States have been coming out with stories about sexual assault and sexual harassment (SASH) within powerful institutions (Maas et al., 2018). While these allegations have been serious, the fate of the careers of those who are politically affiliated and accused have varied, depending on party politics, political prospects, and ultimately on the electorate.

The 2016 reveal of the Access Hollywood tape wherein Donald Trump acknowledged having sexually predatory behavior inspired a stream of women to come out with stories corroborating his sexually aggressive tendencies (Kurtzleben, 2016). This series of events inflamed national discourse about women’s bodily autonomy and perceptions of allegations of SASH in American culture. In response to the burgeoning accusations, Trump accused all the women of making up the stories to bolster the opposition (Sampathkumar, 2017) and labeled the conversation on the tape as “locker room talk” (Maas et al., 2018). Trump’s political ambitions were not squandered by the negative news, as he was elected president, yet the allegations continue to prompt regular discourse in the media regarding his moral character (Dickinson, 2018).

The 2017 contest between Republican Roy Moore and Democrat Doug Jones in the conservative state of Alabama brought the subject of SASH into prominent public discussion again (Jacobs and Smith, 2017). The media coverage of the election brought to light accusations from dozens of women claiming Moore had sexually preyed on them as teenagers (Bloch et al., 2017) and framed the election as a retest for the American electorate on the issue of sexual predators in public office. Jones won the election by 1.6 percentage points, which can also be attributed to Moore’s history of racist comments and actions and a particularly high voter turnout among African Americans (Bloch et al., 2017). In light of this narrow win, it is difficult to neatly conclude that the allegations of SASH had a significant impact on voters’ decisions.

Public conversation on the fitness of public officials accused of SASH grew more salient during the 2018 nomination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Dramatic nomination hearings came to signify the divisive and particularly personal nature of conversation in American politics (NYTimes.com, 2018). Despite intense media attention and public outrage over the nomination of a man accused of sexual assault, Kavanaugh was confirmed.

Thus, while many of the federal politicians accused of SASH in the United States in recent years have been forced by party leadership to resign or not to seek re-election, such as Representatives Patrick Meehan (D-PA), John Conyers (D-Mich), Blake Farenthold (R-TX), Joe Barton (R-TX), Ruben Kihuen (D-NV), and Al Franken (D-Minn), others have been able to proceed with their political ambitions without repercussion. These include Representatives Alcee Hastings (D-AL) and Bobby Scott (D-VA), President Donald Trump (R), and Justice Brett Kavanaugh (Drew et al., 2018; Garofoli, 2018). Variations in the effect that allegations of SASH have on the career of politicians suggest variations in the degree and magnitude in which voters hold politicians accountable for such actions. This research aims to measure which members of the electorate take allegations of SASH into consideration, if and how allegations impact their choice in an election, and why the demographic groups may have differing reactions.

The charges against the politicians accused in recent high-profile cases vary greatly in severity (Catanese, 2017). For the purposes of this article, we will consider accusations of SASH as classified in recent high-profile reports in the political arena, such as the cases mentioned previously involving Representatives Meehan, Conyers, Farenthold, Barton, Kihuen, Franken, Hastings, Scott, President Trump, and Justice Kavanaugh. The typical allegation features unwanted touching, groping, and harassment within a relationship of unequal power.

The subject of an allegation of SASH is unique in the context of a political election because some people are inherently skeptical of allegations of SASH (Donat and D’Emilio, 1992; Frese et al., 2004; Harrell and Castaneda, 2009) and public opinion is consequential (Buttice and Stone, 2012; Campbell, 1960; Savigny, 2004). Because some people have an inherent skeptical reaction to the validity of allegations of SASH, they will incite a different reaction than other political scandals such as financial scandal or consensual infidelity, because their truth is not necessarily instinctively questioned. In a contest of public opinion, it matters how voters consider SASH allegations: whether or not they take allegations at face value, treat them with skepticism, or consider them to be a tool of the opposing party. In this article, we argue that variations on the degree in which voters penalize candidates for allegations of SASH depend on their inclination to believe or not the victims and this is contingent to their party affiliation. We test this argument using an original randomized experiment applied to a population of 751 American citizens over 18 years old, and shed further light on the causal mechanism by looking into the respondents’ open-ended answers.

Scholars have long agreed that though voters primarily choose candidates based on shared party affiliation, considerations of candidates’ personal characteristics are becoming increasingly relevant, and candidate scandals tend to hurt their electoral chances (Buttice and Stone, 2012; Campbell et al., 1980; Carlson et al., 2008; Funk, 1996). However, the subject of accusations of SASH—as opposed to a scandal involving consensual infidelity—in the political arena is only recently being explored and to the best of our knowledge, there is limited research conducted to survey the population explicitly about their reactions to candidates accused of SASH and their reasons to do so (Stark, 2018). This article contributes to the literature by showing that when partisans are expected to make a choice between supporting their party and penalizing a candidate accused of SASH, they can “argue their way out” by separating the validity of accusations and the desired electoral trajectory of their party’s candidate.

This article proceeds as follows: first, we present a review of the literature to show that the understanding of SASH has grown dramatically in recent decades. Second, we illustrate that the literature finds that candidate characteristics are important to voters, and that descriptive representation finds that personal characteristics have influence elected leadership once in office. Third, we present that there is a gap in the literature on voter judgment of allegations of SASH against candidates, and propose why it is important to distinguish between allegations of SASH from consensual sex scandals. We then hypothesize why voters of certain demographics and party affiliations are more inclined to penalize candidates facing allegations of SASH than others. The section on methodology presents the experiment and it is followed by the “Results” and “Discussion” sections.

The understanding and perception of SASH in American public conversation has evolved throughout the last 70 years, which is a factor that could impact how demographic groups treat allegations of SASH. While SASH is not a new phenomenon, the conversation about sexual violence in the United States was influenced by a definition set by white men and the legal systems they designed. For much of American history, women’s bodies were white men’s legal property, and sexual violence was legally actionable only for men when their property (wives, sisters, and daughters) was damaged. It was not until the 1960s and 1970s that American women began to assert their own perspectives on the subject of sexual violence (Donat and D’Emilio, 1992: 13, 14). Contrary to the main narrative that sexual violence was a random event committed by strangers, leaders in the feminist movement found that it was usually “a violent crime committed against millions of women by men they knew and trusted” (Campbell and Wasco, 2005: 128). The increased awareness of SASH incited increased research on perceptions of SASH in the field of interpersonal behavior, or the study of communications and actions present in human relationships.

Scholars relate the prevalence of sexual violence to a culture of masculinity and rape (rape culture; Anderson and Swainson, 2001; Rozee and Koss, 2001) where sexual violence is condoned by the constructs of the society which are set up so that women have less power than men (Siegel, 2003). The evidence of rape culture in the United States is structurally integrated in all levels of society (Rozee and Koss, 2001: 295, 296) through the institutions which fail to protect women from equal justice and wherein men predominantly hold the most powerful positions. Whether it is perceived or real, the distance between power held by men and by women has directly resulted in cycles of harassment, misconduct, and abuse (Barreto et al., 2009; Drew et al., 2018). That SASH is an expression of dominance and symptom of rape culture rather than an unleashed, unreciprocated sexual impulse is the commonly accepted perspective in the literature today (Anderson and Swainson, 2001; Brenner, 2013; Drew et al., 2018; Rozee and Koss, 2001; Siegel, 2003).

However, the public’s understanding of sexual violence and women’s empowerment led to claims of sexual violence being regarded with increased skepticism in the 1970s (it had always had an air of mistrust because of the private nature of most encounters). The logic was that, because women were choosing to violate the norms of subordination to men, they also sacrificed their right to protection. Therefore, an empowered woman who claimed to be a victim of sexual violence generally was regarded as if she brought it upon herself because she had rejected men’s protection (Donat and D’Emilio, 1992: 14).

Due to the historical mistrust on the subject of sexual violence, there has been much research on attitudes toward allegations of sexual violence and rape myth acceptance. Rape myth acceptance is confirmed in the literature as the level of willingness a person may have to disbelieve a victim’s story, or “the amount of stereotypic ideas people have about rape, such as that women falsely accuse men of rape, rape is not harmful, women want or enjoy rape, or women cause or deserve rape by inappropriate or risky behavior” (Frese et al., 2004).

The prevalence of sexual violence is evident nowadays with victims reporting in increasing numbers new and historical accounts of SASH (Campbell and Wasco, 2005; Harrell and Castaneda, 2009; Krook, 2017; Rozee and Koss, 2001). It is common for women to reveal stories of SASH with the encouragement or corroboration of other victims (Gardner, 2009). For example, in the 1990s, there was a surge in reporting called the “Anita Hill effect” after former staffer for Justice Clarence Thomas, Anita Hill, testified in the Justice’s confirmation hearings about his sexual harassment (Brenner, 2013). The present-day surge in reporting can be tracked to the “#MeToo movement” that motivated women around the world to share their own experiences of harassment and intimidation in the workplace (Krook, 2017).

Today, SASH is widely recognized as acts borne out of a situation of unequal power and the outpouring of allegations through the #MeToo movement indicates that many people have been victims of, or know someone who has been a victim of SASH. Since abuse of power is found to be an important factor for voter consideration (Doherty et al., 2011), it could be that allegations of SASH in the context of a political election will incite a strong judgment from many voters.

Since the 1770s—the inception of the US government—candidates’ personal characteristics as an electoral tool has been a point of discussion and consequently, a source of research (Summers, 2000), as we will now describe in more detail. Since the 1960s and 1970s, there has been increasing public awareness of SASH and consequently, increasing studies in the field of interpersonal behavior that analyzes perceptions of SASH (Donat and D’Emilio, 1992). However, to the best of our knowledge, the insights about perception of SASH derived from the field of interpersonal behavior has not been connected to research on candidates’ personal characteristics as an electoral tool in the field of political science.

Scholarly literature has long agreed that party identification is a key driver in determining voter choice, but advances in technological communications have allowed for greater public investment in personal characteristics of candidates and, therefore, they are also a determinant of a candidate’s success (Campbell, 1960; Denver et al., 2012; Fiorina, 2002; Savigny, 2004; Summers, 2000). Positive personal characteristics raise the candidate’s electability, and negative personal characteristics will have a negative impact (Buttice and Stone, 2012; Campbell et al., 1980), but what constitutes a positive or negative personal characteristic is largely dependent on the voter’s perspective (Collignon and Sajuria, 2018) as they are more inclined to vote for someone who looks like them and with whom they share personality features and demographic characteristics than to vote for someone who does not (Campbell and Cowley, 2014; Campbell et al., 1980; Caprara et al., 2007; Collignon and Sajuria, 2018; Savigny, 2004).

Characteristics of a candidate are not only a key to define vote choice. As literature on descriptive representation suggests, personal characteristics of a candidate have an effect on their performance once in office (Campbell, 1960; Fridkin and Kenney, 2011; Ramey et al., 2016). Elected officials in democracies represent not only the expressed preferences of their constituencies, but also those of their descriptive characteristics that are politically relevant, such as gender (Sanbonmatsu, 2003), race (Hardy-Fanta, 2017), and locality (Collignon and Sajuria, 2018). For example, descriptive representation suggests that female representatives are more capable of representing female voters because of shared experiences and identities (Campbell et al., 2010). The body of research on descriptive representation suggests that while it is undeniable that should be an aim for representative democracies, it is not because of the similarity in demographics but because there is value in ensuring shared experiences of representatives and the electorate. In other words, voters choose candidates based on personal similarities, and the personal lives of politicians matter because their personal experiences factor in their representation.

Taking into consideration the fact that political contests are increasingly evaluated by the candidate’s personal characteristics (Campbell, 1960), that certain personal characteristics appeal to certain people (Collignon and Sajuria, 2018), and that negative personal information bodes negatively for the candidate (Buttice and Stone, 2012; Campbell et al., 1980), it could be argued that a candidate’s alleged propensity to sexually abuse could damage their electoral chances. In addition, when factoring in that personal experiences factor in representation (Campbell et al., 2010), it could also be argued that it also impacts their elected leadership.

Research on how voters respond to negative personal information about candidates agrees that scandals have a markedly negative impact on voters’ judgment of the candidate (Carlson et al., 2008; Funk, 1996). Research on the impact of scandals analyzes primarily financial and consensual sex scandals (Carlson et al., 2008; Funk, 1996), and within those subjects, voters’ predispositions and media sources (Peterson and Vonnahme, 2014), and contextual considerations, such as a good economy (Zaller, 1998). Findings suggest that competence-related scandals, such as tax evasion, have a greater impact on voters’ judgment than emotional scandals such as marital infidelity, with voters relating financial fraud to concern for the potential abuse of public funds (Funk, 1996). But while the negative impact of scandals and consensual sex scandals such as marital infidelity is well documented, the literature largely fails to distinguish between consensual sex scandals and SASH (Craig and Cossette, 2020; Stark, 2018).

Previous research suggest that an abuse of power is a prominent factor that prompts voters to take scandals into consideration (Doherty et al., 2011), suggesting that distinguishing between SASH and consensual sex scandals is important (Donat and D’Emilio, 1992). For example, stories that a candidate has cheated on a spouse may impact voters differently than a candidate who has allegedly sexually harassed his or her intern, because cheating may be considered immoral but not necessarily an act that takes advantage of an unequal relationship. With newfound awareness of SASH, following the #MeToo movement in which many published allegations of SASH about prominent people, the consideration that SASH is an abuse of power in an unequal relationship is a key to the conversation about voter perception of allegations of SASH in an election for public office. The need to break down the analysis of the impact of “sex scandals,” by looking specifically at the impact of allegations of SASH, has been suggested for future research since the subject has become prominent in American political conversation (Craig and Cossette, 2020).

Separately, much research within the field of interpersonal behavior analyzes perceptions and attitudes about allegations of SASH, and how and why certain populations react to claims (Anderson et al., 1997; Anderson and Swainson, 2001; Barnett and Hilz, 2017; Frese et al., 2004). However, there is no literature specifically connecting the research from the field of political science on voter judgment of candidates, and research from the field of interpersonal behavior on perceptions of allegations of SASH. This could be largely due to the fact that accusations of SASH in the political arena, as we have encountered them in the last 5 years have only recently been taken into consideration as a tool of public discourse.

In summary, we understand that voters consider the characteristics of the candidate to cast their ballot and that negative personal information about a candidate impacts voters’ judgment. We also know that wrongdoings such as marital infidelity and financial fraud negatively impact the electability of the candidate. But, to the best of our knowledge, there is limited literature on how allegations of SASH impact voters’ judgment (Craig and Cossette, 2020) and there is even less work on why it does so. In the following section, we theorize that, while voters are likely to be impacted by candidates’ negative personal characteristics, the way in which voters perceive allegations about SASH offers complexity. The variation we will observe is in relation to “rape myth acceptance,” the likelihood that a voter may question the validity of a story of sexual violence outright, and the mitigating effect of partisanship.

Research largely concludes that some demographic groups, including men, conservatives, and “older” people are more likely to have attitudes classified as rape myth acceptance than women, liberals, and younger generations (Anderson et al., 1997; Anderson and Swainson, 2001; Campbell and Wasco, 2005). Studies on sexual violence find that women are victims of SASH more prevalently than men and that they are less prone to rape myth acceptance; that is, less likely to question the validity of stories of sexual violence and, therefore, they are more likely to relate to the issue more personally and have more empathy for victims than men (Anderson et al., 1997; Anderson and Swainson, 2001; Barnett and Hilz, 2017; Campbell and Wasco, 2005; Harrell and Castaneda, 2009; Rozee and Koss, 2001). In their study of perceptions of allegations of rape, Anderson, Cooper and Okamura found “the strongest demographic predictor of attitudes toward rape was the sex of the respondent: men expressed more accepting attitudes toward rape than did women” (Anderson et al., 1997: 311). Victims of SASH, who are most commonly women, are more likely than those who have not experienced SASH, to have unfavorable views of perpetrators.

This shared perspective has power in the American electorate. Loosely defined, single-issue-based groups that share a common belief or perspective, such as women victims of SASH, are strong influences on electoral decision-making (Campbell and Wasco, 2005). Because women are most often victims of SASH, and voters’ attitudes are oftentimes based on perceived personal similarities and connections with a candidate, we hypothesize that women are more likely than men to be impacted by an allegation of a candidate committing SASH.

On the subject of age, we argue that younger people will consider the issue of sexual assault allegations as a factor in their voting decision more than older people because younger adults have lived the entirety of their lives with the social and legal acknowledgment of SASH. Because the first studies on the prevalence of sexual violence were released in 1985 (Harrell and Castaneda, 2009), we are categorizing “younger” Americans as those younger than 35 years, and assume they will have gone through childhood in an environment informed by the legal recognition and definition of SASH. We categorize “older” Americans as aged 35 years and above because we assume that Americans older than age 35 (at the time of this research) experienced childhood without the social understanding of SASH as we know it to be today. As history progressed, women’s involvement in the conversation about SASH helped reshape how it is understood. Yet, cultural norms do not change immediately. Older people may be less receptive to adjusting their understanding of social life (Anderson et al., 1997: 311). Subsequently, we hypothesize that older people will be less inclined than younger people to revoke their support for a candidate based on an allegation of SASH.

Theres more at the link, really makes you wonder about the creatures we inhabit this earth with.

#science

9 notes · View notes

heyadam-blog2 · 4 years

Text

Is influencer marketing for every brand?

First of all, what is influencer marketing?

For the last few years, social media has become an integral part of people’s everyday lives. As more users were joining portals like Instagram, Facebook, Youtube or Snapchat, looking for lifestyle inspirations, many of them became content creators themselves, sharing their own impressions, ideas, and experiences by uploading photos, videos and stories for others to follow. This is the point where influencer marketing was born and quickly drew the attention of marketers who saw an opportunity to reach their potential costumers via particular influencers whose image fit the character of the brand or specific product much better than traditional channels. In result the average monthly search for “influencer marketing” in Google rises constantly:

Graphic 1. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=%2Fm%2F026bgmq

However one question still remains: does influencer marketing really work for brands? The general answer is simple: yes, it most certainly does. Statistics speak for themselves.

According to Influencer Marketing Hub studies 84% of marketers evaluate their cooperation with influencers as „effective“. Nielsen’s report finds out that marketing campaigns which engage influencers generate $6.5 of return for every $1 invested.

[source: https://www.whitepress.pl/baza-wiedzy/590/czy-influencer-marketing-sie-oplaca]. In accordance with Mediakix 65% of brands’ influencer marketing budgets increased in 2019, while only 2% decreased. 17% of companies spend over half of their whole marketing budget on influencers. 89% of marketers say that ROI (return from investment) from influencer marketing is the same or better than traditional channels. The whole influencer marketing global spend is estimated to reach 5 – 10 billion $ market in 2020. [source: https://www.bigcommerce.com/blog/influencer-marketing-statistics/#10-most-important-influencer-marketing-statistics-for-2019]

Graphic 2. https://mediakix.com/blog/influencer-marketing-industry-ad-spend-chart/

Does it mean that influencer marketing is a silver bullet strategy? Unfortunately life is never that easy and the fact that your brand simply invests in influencer marketing campaign doesn’t necessarily imply that your product will start to sells itself.

Therefore – is influencer marketing for your brand? To find the answer for this question you definitely should ask yourself few others first.

Know what you want, know what to expect

Influencer marketing is only a tool. If you want to succeed, you have to know how to use it right. Performance of your action depends on many factors such as magnitude of your brand, specific objective of the campaign, characteristics of the product, to whom you want to sell it, how to match your product with particular influencer and their image. Dealing with these topics will help you create an adequate strategy, estimate the budget needed and eventually verify results of the campaign to answer the key question: “is influencer marketing for my brand?”

How big is your brand? Depending on actual magnitude of your company, it’s presence, recognition and impact range on social media channels will vary, probably the same as your budget. However it doesn’t mean it’s a game only for the big ones. Large brands often compete against each other, trying to outspend the rivals – that consumes a lot of resources. Being small may be advantageous as long as you introduce something new, therefore fresh, interesting and exciting for SM users. What is important here, is the fact that you should create right concept and impression around your brand, and find right influencers matching your niche. As you probably can’t afford extensive campaign, try to cooperate with micro influencers, who will often be satisfied with barter exchange for their work.

What is the main objective of your campaign? Before embarking on a campaign, it’s crucial to be clear of your goals. In general, KPIs (target key performance indicators) for brands include two categories:

Brand awareness: metrics associated with increasing audience awareness of your product, such as content responses - likes, comments, mentions. The most common objective for influencer marketing campaigns is establishing awareness around the brand and to reach new audiences. As mentioned before, it should be the right tactic for small, new brands.

Direct response: metrics associated with particular actions, such as clicks, conversions and finally sales of your product. However you should avoid using too many CTAs (calls-to-action) buttons in a single post — this may cause confusion among users and can negatively affect performance.

What actually is your product? This may sound obvious, but you really need to have a good product to sell. A product that consumers will genuinely need, want or love is a basis of your campaign. It’s no use having whatever number of influencers giving ‘rave reviews’ if the real customers are disappointed. If you don’t have a product that people would be satisfied with, influencer (or any other) marketing is probably not for your brand.Even if your product is great, you have to distinguish it among the others. It won’t be possible if you are not the only one who sells it. There are many businesses that just resell other brand’s products. If this is your case, you need to give consumers very good reason to buy product from you instead of elsewhere.You have to remember that social media, especially Instagram that is the major platform for influencers, impose hyper-realistic aesthetic forms where visual aspect of advertised products play the key role. Attractive design of your product is an important quality. According to Patrick Barwise and Sean Meehan from the Harvard Business Review: “social media makes it more urgent than ever that companies get the basics right, developing and reliably delivering on a compelling brand promise.” [source: https://www.apptamin.com/blog/influencer-marketing-considerations/]

Who is a target group of your campaign? Does your product have wide appeal? Who do you sell your product to? Is it an individual consumer or another company, institution or even a state? This might seem odd, but if your brand produces very niche, technical products like spaceship components for example (bought by NASA), successful execution of influencer marketing campaign for your brand will most probably be very difficult. Even if your potential client is individual before you get into influencer marketing, you should first determine whether your product will interest enough people. Products that are addressed to wide spectrum of consumers tend to perform best with influencer marketing. Shampoo > technical ski equipment.

Are there influencers whose audience matches your target market?Influencer marketing is about engagement. Yes, you definitely should engage only the influencers who have a close match to your perfect target audience. Semi-close matches usually don’t work good unless influencer has a lot of well-engaged followers. There should be a flawless overlap between your target audience and that of your influencer’s. For example, if you sell an innovative backpack aimed specifically at women, a generic travel gear blogger will be nowhere near as effective as a travel gear AND women orientated niche. Likewise, a girl blogger writing for girls who is not interested in travel gear will have only a small impact.

You’ll never try, you’ll never know

To sum up: Is influencer marketing for every brand? Theoretically, YES. However, as it was elaborated before: the success of your campaign depends on many factors managing which can be difficult, expensive and not always effective. Often it may turn out that the best solution would be hiring someone who is willing to do that for you.

There are few companies, which can help you create right campaign for your brand or your products considering characteristic of brand’s conditions and provide influencers corresponding with your niche. One of them is Indahash – one of the major, and most widely recognized platform that organize cooperation between brands and influencers. It also provides support at every stage, from budgeting and assistance in choosing creators to analysis of the final reports. Indahash is:

„END-TO-END INFLUENCER MARKETING SOLUTION

We have a very rigorous process in place before and after creators are approved on the indaHash platform, so you can be sure you are reaching real people. With over 900 000 creators from 83 markets registered in the indaHash app, we can run any multi-country, scalable campaign you may need.

TRUSTED BY GLOBAL BRANDS

Our technology platform is used by the world's largest brands and has been put to the test to guaranteee the highest quality and value is delivered. You too can benefit from our platform just as these global brands do on a daily basis.”

The best way to know if influencer marketing is for you is to try!

Sources:

1. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=%2Fm%2F026bgmq

2. https://www.whitepress.pl/baza-wiedzy/590/czy-influencer-marketing-sie-oplaca

3. https://www.bigcommerce.com/blog/influencer-marketing-statistics/#10-most-important-influencer-marketing-statistics-for-2019

4. https://mediakix.com/blog/influencer-marketing-industry-ad-spend-chart/

5. https://www.apptamin.com/blog/influencer-marketing-considerations/

6. https://www.whitepress.pl/baza-wiedzy/442/jak-kreowac-marke-w-blogosferze

7. https://www.whitepress.pl/baza-wiedzy/550/influencer-marketing-dla-malych-firm-–-podstawowa-wiedza-w-pigulce

8. https://www.jcsocialmedia.com/how-to-not-waste-money-on-influencer-marketing/

1 note · View note

avadoramimouni · 5 years

Video

The Stunning Avadora Mimouni @avadoramimouni strutted her Famous #signaturewalk for the Fashion Show @fitreslife for the #FADC @fashionadc last night. This Fabulous Mosiac highlights why she rules the Catwalk in New York, Paris & Europe! Brava! PR/Coordinator/Event Planner/Video/Montage: Ivonne Camacho @absolutmoderne Director: Professor Uvenio @uvenio_couture Gown by: Megan Hollister Dress by: Keriane Meehan Photographer: Charles Farrah @cfarrahburlesque Photographer: Paul Walker @shootmenycmodels #avadoramimouni #avadoramimounicollection #AbsolutModerne #fashionshow #fashioninstituteoftechnology #ivonnecamacho . . . . . . . . #model #runwaymodel #igfashion #fashiongram #style #myvideo #runway #PR #coffeeteatees #churchofgirlfriends #luxmags #gorgeous #glamour #omg #BrandingVipEvents #montagesbyIvonnecamacho (at Fashion Institute of Technology) https://www.instagram.com/p/Bxa5e5xHL8Y/?igshid=bxr6k2gtyj0u

2 notes · View notes

rocklandhistoryblog · 2 years

Text

Tune in to the next Crossroads of Rockland History on Monday, May 16, at 9:30am on WRCR Radio 1700AM

We’ll learn all about the new book Confessions of a Hayseed D.A, by Robert R. Meehan. In this compelling page turner, former Rockland District Attorney Robert R. Meehan takes the reader through his journey from naive do-gooder to seasoned prosecutor, investigating and solving heinous crimes and surviving an attempt on his life that upended his family’s world.

Clare Sheridan’s guest will be Meehan’s daughter, Kathleen Meehan Do, who discovered her father’s manuscript years after his passing. She has edited the text, researched cases cited by her father, and interviewed some of the key players whose names appear within book, creating a compelling narrative perfect for Rockland history enthusiasts.

About Robert Meehan: Robert R. Meehan was born in 1930 and died in 2004. He was District Attorney of Rockland County from 1965 to 1974. He would later go on to become NYS Special Assistant Attorney General for Medicaid Fraud and a Rockland County and New York State Supreme Court Judge until his retirement in 2000.

About Kathleen Meehan Do: Kathleen Meehan Do is a communications specialist who has served in the administration of New York Governor Mario M. Cuomo, Pennsylvania Congressman Joseph Sesak, and Rockland County Legislature Chairwoman Harriet Cornell, as well as college presidents in New York and New Jersey.

***

Crossroads of Rockland History, a program of the Historical Society of Rockland County, airs on the third Monday of each month at 9:30 am, right after the morning show, on WRCR Radio 1700 AM and www.WRCR.com. Join host Clare Sheridan as we explore, celebrate, and learn about our local history, with different topics and guest speakers every month. If you want to listen to the live broadcast, and you aren't local, simply download the TuneIn Radio App on your smartphone or tablet and search for WRCR. We are pleased to announce that we have begun loading our archived podcasts to all major Podcast platforms.

The Historical Society of Rockland County is a nonprofit educational institution and principal repository for original documents and artifacts relating to Rockland County. Its headquarters are a four-acre site featuring a history museum and the 1832 Jacob Blauvelt House in New City, New York.

www.RocklandHistory.org

0 notes

evoldir · 2 years

Text

Fwd: Postdoc: NottinghamTrentU.MycobacteriumPangenome

Begin forwarded message: > From: [email protected] > Subject: Postdoc: NottinghamTrentU.MycobacteriumPangenome > Date: 29 January 2022 at 07:30:21 GMT > To: [email protected] > > > We are looking for a postdoctoral fellow to join the group of Dr Conor > Meehan at Nottingham Trent University to work on the AMS Springboard > funded project "Incorporating whole genome diversity into the clinical > epidemiology of Mycobacterium tuberculosis". This work is done in > collaboration with the Iqbal group at EMBL-EBI, Cambridge and the Unit > of Mycobacteriology, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Belgium. > > The aim of this project is to evaluate the size of the Mycobacterium > tuberculosis complex pangenome, its functional diversity, and > incorporate this information into public health workflows for detecting > transmission. The focus of this position is on evolutionary analyses > of large-scale genomic data sets and some creation/modification of > SNP calling and molecular epidemiology pipelines. Some supervision of > PhD/MSc/BSc students will be involved. > > The candidate should hold, or be near completion of, a PhD in a relevant > subject (bioinformatics/genomics/evolutionary biology). A strong ability > to code in Python, R or similar is required and previous experience in > Mycobacterium tuberculosis (phylo-)genomics will be an advantage. > > The anticipated start date is April/May 2022 with 2 years of funding > available. > > For informal inquiries pleased contact Conor Meehan: > https://bit.ly/3KVGWhU > For further details and to apply please see: > https://bit.ly/3IQwCWD > > > > "Meehan, Conor" > via IFTTT

0 notes

gravitascivics · 2 years

Text

JUDGING THE NATURAL RIGHTS VIEW, X

An advocate of parochial federalism continues his/her presentation[1] …

This blogger has commented extensively on the tumbled history of political science since the mid-point of the last century. From historical based to behavioral to post behavioral to now critical theory-based research, that discipline has experienced an array of viewpoints by which its research has been guided. As for its effect on civics education, the behavioral/popular values approach with a political systems/structural-functional model guidance has dictated its content in most classrooms.

Whether in the behavioral or post-behavioral stage, the field is/was concerned with how political systems meet the needs of their individual members. This view has maintained its popularity among secondary school educators. They, the educators, see systems as overall sets of institutions that are formulated to be neutral to vying interests.[2] One still observes, even in the post behavioral age, that approach in general government curricular literature and in classroom materials (for example, see the bestselling textbook, Magruder’s American Government[3]).

That is, systems are depicted, to varying degrees, as meeting consumer needs or political demands of their respective citizenries. And this general approach to the study of politics should be kept in mind as students of politics consider or critique this approach. As the analysis in upcoming postings answers the questions posed by Eugene Meehan[4] to analyze the viability of this construct, this consumer/citizen orientation should be kept in mind.

Under the liberal/natural rights perspective, importance lies in the ability of schools to prepare students to make sure that their individual rights are understood and that they can pursue their individual interests with reliable knowledge and effective skills. Their government instruction at the secondary level should be to provide that knowledge and skills.

If successful, students, as adults, can enter the political fray with reasonable chances of success. This leads to what Robert Putnam advocates: social capital.[5] The natural rights perspective, therefore, is a highly practical approach. In this vein, its focus should be where political powers lie.

On that front, readers should keep in mind that the US has a federal system of government in which the power of the overall state is divided between the central and state governments. But the balance between the two levels has through the history of the republic shifted in the direction of the central government. This shift has been caused by a variety of reasons:

· the nationalization and now globalization of the economy,

· the inability of state governments to meet the challenges of economic disasters such as the Great Depression,

· the demands posed by foreign powers in the age of industrialized and nuclear warfare,

· the increased sensitivities to egalitarian ideals and the consequent demands for uniform treatment by public and private entities,

· the incorporation by the federal courts, beginning with the Warren Court, of the Bill of Rights’ guarantees against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment,

· the multiplicity of problems in the modern economy which are truly national in scope,

· the inability or unwillingness of states to tackle social problems such as segregation of the races or poverty, and

· the cultural expression that has grown within the population to look toward Washington for solutions to social and natural problems.[6]

A secondary course in American government or civics should reflect these realities.

Therefore, such courses should divide their attention so that the major concern be with the federal government and its operations. Any issues that they analyze, and study should for the most part be national and international ones. While state and local governments should not be totally ignored, they should not be given nearly the attention of that of the central government.

Political frays of the day are ones in which there are many competing cultural views and in which many important decisions are made by national institutions far from the control of either common individuals or local communities. In this environment, as Maurice P. Hunt and Lawrence E. Metcalf wrote in 1968,

… we say that the chief role of education in a democracy is intelligent or critical transmission of cultural heritage, during the course of which disagreements among individuals and incompatibilities in personal outlook are exposed and resolved creatively.[7]

People have rights concerning their heritage in a diverse population such as that of the US. The government that oversees this competing and conflict-ridden environment needs to, in the name of fairness and respect for individual and group rights involved, manage those contentions that such an environment is bound to generate.

That is, it needs to manage the contentious arenas in an unbiased and procedurally neutral manner.[8] How well is America doing? Here are partial findings from a Pew Research Center study,

Despite these criticisms [referring to mixed feelings of support on the current quality of democratic rule], most Americans say democracy is working well in the United States – though relatively few say it is working very well. At the same time, there is broad support for making sweeping changes to the political system: 61% say “significant changes” are needed in the fundamental “design and structure” of American government to make it work for current times.

The public sends mixed signals about how the American political system should be changed, and no proposals attract bipartisan support. Yet in views of how many of the specific aspects of the political system are working, both Republicans and Democrats express dissatisfaction.

To be sure, there are some positives. A sizable majority of Americans (74%) say the military leadership in the U.S. does not publicly support one party over another, and nearly as many (73%) say the phrase “people are free to peacefully protest” describes this country very or somewhat well.

In general, however, there is a striking mismatch between the public’s goals for American democracy and its views of whether they are being fulfilled. On 23 specific measures assessing democracy, the political system and elections in the United States – each widely regarded by the public as very important – there are only eight on which majorities say the country is doing even somewhat well.[9]

Through the years, America has been considered one of the least – if not the least – statist or authoritarian nation. Yet Matthew C. MacWilliams reports,

What I found is that approximately 18 percent of Americans are highly disposed to authoritarianism, according to their answers to four simple survey questions used by social scientists to estimate this disposition. A further 23 percent or so are just one step below them on the authoritarian scale. This roughly 40 percent of Americans tend to favor authority, obedience and uniformity over freedom, independence and diversity.[10]

With that cautionary note, one that an advocate of natural rights would deem as highly worrisome and serving to advance a commitment to support the natural rights approach in civics, this posting marks an end to this review of that approach. Next will be the application of the approach – given Meehan’s concerns – as it affects the commonplaces of curricular development.

[2] Michael J. Sandel, Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1996).

[3] Daniel M. Shea, Magruder’s American Government (Boston, MA: Prentice Hall/Pearson, 2019).

[4] Eugene J. Meehan, Contemporary Political Thought: A Critical Study (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1967).

[5] Social capital, using the thoughts of Robert Putnam, is characterized by having an active, public-spirited citizenry, egalitarian political relations, and a social environment of trust and cooperation. See Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 2000). This state exists to the extent a citizenry chooses to adopt the entailed values.

[6] As these words are written, the City of Jackson, Mississippi, is seeking federal assistance to solve its water problems. Currently, the water cannot be drunk safely.

[7] Maurice P. Hunt and Lawrence E. Metcalf, Teaching High School Social Studies: Problems in Reflective Thinking and Social Understanding (New York, NY: Harper and Row Publication, 1968), 35.

[8] Sandel, Democracy's Discontent.

[9] “The Public, The Political System and American Democracy,” Pew Research Center (April 26, 2018), accessed August 31, 2022, https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/04/26/the-public-the-political-system-and-american-democracy/. To give readers a sense of the referred to measures, they include “Rights and freedoms of all people are respected” and “Elected officials face serious consequences for misconduct.”

[10] Matthey C. MacWilliams, “Trump Is an Authoritarian. So Are Millions of Americans,” Politico (September 23, 2020), accessed August 31, 2022, https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/09/23/trump-america-authoritarianism-420681.

#political science #political systems #civics curriculum #consumer/citizen orientation #central government #political conflict #citizen satisfaction #authoritarian dispositions #civics education #social studies

0 notes

enthusiasticsobrietyabuse · 3 years

Text

Re-post from r/MeehanSurvivors Reddit Community. An Enthusiastic Sobriety Counselor Survivor Story.

TW: References to child pornography, conversion therapy, homophobia, masturbation, and sex.

I would love nothing more than to preserve my admiration for the program, if only for the reason that it would be easier to do so, but after years of being deceived, I find it utterly absurd to disregard any contempt on the basis of the misplaced gratitude that it saved my life. While the program undoubtedly contributed to my success in a number of ways, it has nevertheless become clear that I’ve walked away with trauma that, even after all of this time, I fail to wholly understand. What I do know, however, is that my disillusionment with enthusiastic sobriety is heavily rooted in how I was treated, as the people who claimed to love me evidently made it their mission to eradicate who I was and, likewise, transform me into a duller, lesser version of themselves. I will never know who I could’ve been had they honored the parts of myself that needed nurturing, only who I am today and the damage I’ve since been left with.

From the moment I joined the program, I knew exactly what its expectations were. It was made abundantly clear throughout the treatment process, where I was bombarded with endless conversations about what it meant to be a winner - a concept given context far beyond a sober individual working the twelve steps. I was not only told how to behave, but what to believe about every area of my life. It did not matter if those areas were deeply personal, as evidenced by the countless discussions related to sex; in fact, I would not only learn who we could and could not fantasize about while masturbating, but what we could and could not do sexually - as if we could not be trusted to determine for ourselves the actions we take in our own bedrooms. I also found myself on the receiving end of many conversations revolving around whether or not it was acceptable to shave one’s own pubic region, as was a commonly held belief that a shaved pubic region was not only unnecessary, but a product of one’s own vanity that, incidentally, mimics child pornography. Perhaps more disturbing, however, was the ideology surrounding pornography, in general, that we were ordinarily subjected to. We were first told that no self-respecting woman would want to be with a man who’s actively watching porn; then, we were told that it alters a man’s behavior so much that women will be able to recognize whether or not they watch it. The possibility of romance was used as a weapon against us by the counselors, as well as group members, to conform to their principles, rather than allowing us to establish our own and when that didn’t work, personal attacks were their next best option. I remember being asked if I really wanted to be the guy who’s strung out on porn the rest of his life, as if it was some kind of crippling addiction that would keep me from getting anything I ever wanted out of life. Even more importantly, however, it was through these frequent exchanges that I became familiarized with “Pavlov’s Dog Theory,” a scientific study so bastardized by the counselors that it existed solely to explain away the possibility of any non-heterosexual orientation. Being insecure with my own sexuality, it was of course music to my ears to discover that my attraction to the same sex, a perversion as I then recognized it, was the result of watching too much porn and could be easily resolved by the work outlined by the program. For the next few years, I would work endlessly to alter my sexual orientation back to “normal” and apparently did so well enough that I was eventually asked to attend the Meehan Institute of Counselor Training.

When I was in counselor training, most of what we discussed had very little to do with counseling; in fact, the information required to pass the state-mandated test was tossed aside in exchange for the radically inappropriate teachings that came directly from the program itself. Examples of this, of course, include the explanation that non-heterosexual orientations were not only “unnatural” but an expression of one’s perverse desire for instant gratification, usually resulting from either their addiction to porn, as I had already learned in outpatient, or their unresolved childhood trauma. It was also reasoned that an attraction to the same sex was often a natural consequence of being in an abusive relationship with a member of the opposite sex, a belief supported only by the theory that the person, in question, had unlikely resolved their own fear of getting hurt again. Some people were just “pussies” that had decided to seek the “easier, softer way,” an almost comical assumption given that there is nothing “easier” or “softer” about being queer. I would actually be referred to as a “pussy” while sharing to one of the program's many directors that I had sexual thoughts about other men. His solution for me was that since “there is nothing romantic about two men butt fucking each other,” I should spend the time wasted fantasizing about that on where I would like to take a girl on a date. It’s these ways of thinking that we, who’s families spend $5,600 to send us to counselor training, learn for the three months that we’re there. It’s these three months, where we are taught that absurdity is a natural substitute for science, that earn us the right to then counsel others, many of whom are children. I never could've imagined the abuse that would follow, despite the seeds that had been sown throughout the better part of my recovery.

A few weeks after I graduated from counselor training, when I was working the Step One shift, a couple of the program's directors took me away from it to smoke cigars with them. It was there that they talked to me about how I needed to work on developing more masculine qualities, perhaps by engaging in a hobby that was, according to them, “outside of my comfort zone.” Later on, one of my coworkers would lecture me for the way I had reached out to a girl in the group, explaining that she, along with others, might think that I’m gay for agreeing to watch a “chick flick” with her. Another coworker would make fun of me for crying to a song that reminded me of my dead parent, for the reason that it was, according to her, a “gay” thing to do. In one of the monthly purpose meetings, the director made jokes about me being “inside” of another male counselor - something that was received only with laughter. Bob Meehan himself would even tell the training class following my own that while I deserved the upmost respect for taking everyone’s shit, I was probably gay. When I would share how I felt, in reference to these incidents, I was told that my options were either to “change it” or to “own it.” I began to internalize all of this and, due to my own desire to be accepted, I began working even harder to change these qualities that had been deemed unacceptable by those around me. I would later be celebrated in a purpose for denouncing a dramatic television show for the reason that when I watched it, it made me feel like a “faggot;” however, even that wouldn’t satisfy those around me, as my sponsor, who was also my coworker, would suggest that I stop watching Friends, as well, due to the fact that it was the kind of show his wife watched. I would experience similar criticism from yet another coworker who suggested that I only liked “girly shit” for “shock value” and that it was nothing more than my ego attempting to differentiate myself from everyone else. If by now you’re wondering why I even participated in these conversations, all I can say is that it was always in pursuit of becoming a better man and I trusted that the staff had those answers. I couldn't have been more wrong, as I can't help but notice today that what I was subjected to is in direct opposition of the very laws that protect employees from this kind of treatment by their employers; however, in the program, what’s illegal is classified as “spiritual.”

For years, I felt relegated to a subclass of human existence and for what reason? I spent years working on the things that made my life unmanageable primarily because the people around me decided that it was. Furthermore, I was promised that if I stopped watching porn, which I did for years, my brain would rewire itself and I would no longer be attracted to men. As stupid as that sounds now, why wouldn’t I, as an 18 year old, believe what I was hearing from who I only presumed to be trained professionals? I trusted them and really worked hard to take their every suggestion, going as far as becoming a member of Sexaholics Anonymous, despite the fact that I had never even had sex at that point. It was nothing if not incredibly painful to do the same thing over and over again, only to be told to get up and try again by the very people who would describe that as insanity in any other case. I was never once told that what I was doing wasn’t working for me; instead, I was told to try harder. In all of the time I spent in the program, I was never even given the option to try something different until after quitting, when someone told me that my sexual orientation, whatever it may be, was perfectly acceptable and far from a determining factor in my ability to effectively work a program. It took years to hear that, the majority of which were spent somewhere that I definitely should have. That is not only unacceptable but they should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.

Alas, the problem I have with the program is not necessarily that they’ll never apologize to me, but that they lack the self-awareness to even consider it. When I shared my concerns about the program with one of their counselors, he dismissed them with the statement that it’s a perfect program ran by imperfect people and that I should judge them not by their actions, but by their intentions, which coincidentally, contradicts the program’s reliance on a quote from the big book of Alcoholics Anonymous that states exactly the opposite. He also told me that I was angry and resentful, despite the fact that I was neither. When I shared my concerns with another counselor, he dismissed them with the suggestion that perhaps the counseling I received, in regards to my sexual orientation, resulted from how I presented it to the staff. His feedback was not only highly insulting, but a complete bastardization of the facts. Not only was I brutally honest about that area of my life, so much that it's all I spoke of, but I was the client and it was far from my role to ensure that the counselors did their job. I was little more than a child at the time; nevertheless, the implication that my negative experiences were all my fault only served as evidence that any attempt to cooperate with the program, and convince them of the ways in which I was harmed, is futile. Why would I want to, anyway, after years of watching any criticism of the program be rationalized as the delusions of “bailed kids” or “disgruntled ex-staff?” The only answer would be to prevent it from happening again, although to think that outcome is even a possibility appears naïve at best. They’ve made it abundantly clear where they stand, that they’re right, everyone else is wrong, and there’s no reason for them to change anything - lest of course it threatens their credibility, which in that case they only become more insidious in their transgressions.

TLDR: The program not only intrusively dictates the sex lives of their clients, but has proven itself to be particularly unloving toward those who are LGBTQIA+. It is a cultural issue that can not be reduced to a few examples of bad counseling. It is clear that they see no reason whatsoever to change this.

#the insight program #the cornerstone program #the pathway program #the crossroads program #the full circle program #believe survivors #breakingcodesilence #troubled teen industry #clint stonebraker

7 notes · View notes