Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Nursing Student Safely Delivers Baby In Car

Nice. Further evidence women don't need hospitals to do something they've evolved to be able to do. Nursing student in Brooklyn safely delivers baby in car.

Baby born in car. Source: NY Post

Woot woot! I've been waiting for an article like this, because there are few things I'm more passionate about than a woman's right to have a safe, natural, intervention-free childbirth. No, I'm not one of those tree-hugging hippies who host drum circles, though I do hug trees sometimes and my mom's a hippie. There are two, very strong stories, among a boat-load of evidence, that lead me to feel that at-home childbirth under the care of a midwife is the safest option for me and my (as of now hypothetical) child.

The first is the story of Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis (link goes to Wikipedia page). Dr. Sammelweis was the equivalent of a chief resident today at a hospital in 1847, and at the time the maternal death rate for puerperal fever was about 10%. In the midwives ward of the hospital, the death rate was less than 4%. He noticed that the doctors were going into the delivery rooms right after having performed autopsies. When a friend of his died after getting a cut during an autopsy, Dr. Sammelweis put two and two together and experimented with his own doctors ward. He found that a chlorine solution similar to bleach today seemed to work the best at removing the cadaver smell. He started to make the doctors wash their hands when travelling from autopsy to patient. The results were staggering: the death rate went from 18.3% in April to 2.2% in June (policy implemented mid-May). He took his case to other hospitals.

Instead of his solution being implemented immediately, he was laughed as, as germ theory had yet to be discovered. His proposal stated that some "unknown cadaverous particle" was being carried on the doctor's hands, and it seemed ridiculous at the time. Once Louis Pasteur discovered germs, Sammelweis's policy was revived, and maternal deaths due to infection dropped dramatically. Moral of the story: Doctors can sometimes create the very problems they seek to avoid. A modern day example of this is having sick people congregate in one location (a hospital), where illness can be easily spread in waiting and emergency rooms. Yet having a hospital over a home-visiting doctor is considered "progress."

The second story is about The Farm, which is near Summerland, Tennessee. This small community is the location of one of the longest free-standing birthing centers in the U.S., directed by Ina May Gaskin (pictured above to the left), and has been keeping statistics on its births for over 30 years. The birthing center is run by midwives, who have good relationships with doctors in nearby hospitals in case a woman needs to transfer. This rarely happens: from 1970 to 2000, less than 5% of women needed transportation, and only 1.3% of the total births were transported on an "emergency" basis (see image below). Their c-section rate was 1.4%, while the national average in 2001 was 24.4%, with some suggesting that it's as high as 33% now. The World Health Organization says that any level of c-section rate above 15% is likely to cause more harm than good.
Source: InaMay.com

The U.S. is killing its mothers with doctors who pursue courses of active management, a seemingly benign attempt at controlling a natural form of chaos that cascades into major surgery in which a woman who has just had her guts splayed out for the world to see and a baby ripped from her womb is supposed to recover in just 2-4 days (NIH). She is then sent home with a 7-9 pound baby while recovering from said major abdominal surgery. Just how is she supposed to pick the child up? Let alone breastfeed it when her stomach is sore and she's on pain meds (which probably shouldn't be fed to the baby anyway) and the meds are dulling the bonding response that is so key in developing successful breastfeeding. Modern surgical technology is advancing in the direction of being minimally invasive, yet there is no minimally invasive way to pull a 7 pound baby out of a uterus. That's like trying to gently remove a testicle. It just doesn't work.

When I am ready to have a child, I will not choose the supposedly educated M.D.s, who may have never seen a normal, non-medical, physiological birth that is supportive of the mother's ability to deliver a child on her own. Doctors go in to a delivery assuming they will be needed, and then got bored when they realized women didn't need them. Now there are monitors and drugs and guided pushing and episiotomies all to make the doctor feel a little less useless. No thanks. I don't need a busybody trying to control what my body already knows how to do.

While I know my passion about the subject comes through rather strongly, and that may even be putting it lightly, I hope that each person does their own research, and follows what their body tells them. There are many stories of women reporting a feeling of something just not being right just before or during labor, deciding to transport to a hospital, and learning that their gut feeling was correct. Get enough information to make intelligent decisions, and always keep in mind there may be alternatives you just don't know about, because either the media doesn't present them to you or because some (rather wealthy) people have an interest in keeping you ignorant.

Monday, September 26, 2011

U.S. Short-Sightedness Takes Aim At Soil

Oh yeah. This is smart: High corn prices encourages farmers to skip crop rotation

So, I'm a gardener. Not a commercial farmer. But I know that plants need nutrients. Certain plants take more of a certain kind of nutrient, and some plants (beans, for example) are really good at putting particular nutrient back in the soil. You can't do that if you're one trick pony. Like diets and genetics, nature works best with diversity. Without it, crop yields decrease and eventually, you get ecological collapse.

Source: Wikipedia

Remember the Dust Bowl? We didn't learn well enough from the Great Depression to keep our hands out of the credit card cookie jar, and we haven't learned well enough from the Dust Bowl to keep good soil husbandry tactics. Watch; in 20 years, we'll have another Dust Bowl. Texas is already on record as having one of the driest 12-month periods in its history (August-July 2010-11). With outdoor burns banned in most (251 of 254) counties in Texas, farmers are left without their most expedient method of weeding: burning the field. An overall benefit, really, because allowing the land to recover from harvesting naturally is much better than burning, which sucks all the nutrients back out.

Lower crop yields due to lack of crop rotation also encourages greater chemical use, in the form of herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers. These chemicals then drain into run-off, usually into the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi River. Of course, just because they've been shipped out to see doesn't mean they stop doing damage. This article describes an area in the Gulf of Mexico called the "dead zone," an area of hypoxic (lacking oxygen) waters in which life cannot survive. That sentence deserves it's own paragraph.

An area of the seas that cannot support life due to a lack of oxygen has been created and made worse because of chemical fertilizers.

The same chemical fertilizers that farmers will now need because of decreasing crop yields because they weren't smart enough to ignore the siren call of profit and sacrificed their top soil.

You are almost already required to take a B-12 supplements if you live in the U.S. because of the degradation of the top soil. B-12 is only manufactured by bacteria, and I may be wrong on this, but bacteria don't seem to live very well under conditions of herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers.

So shall we review?

Farmers aren't rotating their crops because of record corn prices.
Not rotating their crops was one of the causes of the Dust Bowl in the 1930s.
The increased use of chemicals for agriculture will result in increased run-off into the Gulf of Mexico, causing environmental damage in the form of dead zones (or a massive dead zone, depending on who you ask).
The top soil is already so bad that people in the U.S. can't get the micronutrients they need because the source of the nutrient has been killed off by the chemicals used to ensure higher crop yields.

When we will stop pursuing wealth at the cost of everything we (should) love and cherish the most?

Saturday, September 24, 2011

Thank You For Your Random Acts Of Kindness

Yesterday, the fiance and I went to our local Western Bagel. I'm a huge fan of the Traditional (minus the capers, yuck!). As we enter the business, my partner holds the door open for a man who looks like he's a bit rushed. An employee offers to take the next customer in line, and my fiance and I (independently, at the same time) gesture with our arms and tell the guy to go in front of us. We hadn't completely decided on what to order yet, so we didn't want to hold up the line. The guy seemed a bit surprised and made his order. We then made ours.

While I waited for our order, I noticed the man had just a turkey sandwich. But as the stranger began to pay for his order, I heard the employee say something about "two traditionals and one lox and cream cheese" (part of our order). I'm not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed sometimes, so the significance eluded me; for the time being, I just thought they were overcharging him. He sat, took about two bites of his sandwich, and then left, not even asking for a to-go box.

Our bagels were ready in a few minutes, so my fiance walked up to help carry the plates to the table while I took care of the bill. As I approached to get rung up, the employees looked at me a little confused. There was a short little discussion amongst themselves in Spanish, but I caught "muchacho". A male friend? An employee explained: "Your friend? The guy? He paid for your order." Now it was my turn to be confused. "Yeah, he paid for everything but the last bagel. $1.46 please." I handed her my card and returned to the table to explain the whole thing to my fiance. Needless to say, he was as surprised as I was.

To that guy, and anyone else who does a kindness for a stranger, keep in mind that you may have just turned someone's day around. While obviously not too poor to go to Western Bagel, money isn't exactly free-flowing for us, or for millions or other Americans. Even the smallest courtesy, favor, or charity can make someone whose life is on the edge have just enough hope to keep going, to keep pushing toward the goal of someday it being better than the day before. Just a compliment can be enough to help someone be able to put one foot in front of the other, even when it feels their feet are encased in concrete. No matter how little you have, you can always at least give someone a compliment. There's a neat warm fuzzy feeling you get when you put a smile on someone's face because of thoughtful words.

The only way out of this economy is if we help each other, through small acts of kindness. A purchased meal, help with household chores, getting together to cook meals for the week, all these things that build community will make it easier for all of us to survive, and survive happily, if we just stop being selfish enough in thinking we don't have the time or the energy. To receive, give. I have never found this to not be true.

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Why I Prefer Texting Over Calling


A new study shows around 73% of adults prefer to use their phones for texting rather than calling.

I happen to one of those adults, for several reasons.

Source: Wikipedia

1. Written conversations are clearer than verbal conversations.
If you need to give me instructions, such as what you want from the local fast-food joint, please text it. I don't have to worry about forgetting that you don't like pickles, or grilled onions, or that I needed to pick up the milk before I got home. Furthermore, people tend to think about bit more about what they want to say when they have to write it down, so any communication that is being attempted is more likely to be successful.

The exception: Tone of voice, and other forms of nonverbal communication. Unfortunately, text messaging isn't the best medium for joking around. Non-verbal communication that signals sarcasm will come off as completely serious in a texting format. If the conversation is getting that involved, wait until you can at least call the other person.

2. Texting gives both parties the freedom to multitask.
This is really important in today's "fly by the seat of your pants" job market. Sometimes the difference between having a job and not having a job is as thin as how much time you spend on the phone. Texting gives the sender and receiver the freedom to continue working on a project while waiting for the message to arrive. I've known very few people who can talk on the phone and type at the same time (I'm not one of them!), so a phone conversation would require too much attention from the task at hand. If the situation requires an immediate answer before progress can continue, a phone call may be warranted. By reserving phone calls for such a situation, it also helps the person being called determine if the call is important enough to answer. My fiance and I will often answer the phone because we know the person who is calling only calls if it's important or immediate, instead of letting the call go to voicemail. Speaking of which. . .

3. There is no calling or password necessary to access a text message.
I can read a text, type a response, and send a text in less than 5 seconds in some cases. Checking my voicemail requires dialing voicemail, waiting for the connection, waiting for the voice to come on the line, entering my password, waiting for "You have 1 new message. First new message: ," delete message. . . okay I think you get my point. The other problem with voicemails; they are almost always from people you have no interest in talking to, like a doctor, a lawyer, or your boss. If you don't want people to assume you're someone they would rather avoid, send a text or continue calling until they answer the phone.

On redialing:
You've called me, I haven't answered, but you don't want to leave a voicemail. What do you do? Depends. In my family, the saying goes, "If it's important, they'll call back." We know that if something serious is going down, the family member will call, hang up at the voicemail, and then almost immediately call back. It's the familial equivalent of a fire alarm or rallying the troops. If it's somewhat less important than that but still requiring a phone call, text a request for a callback. This allows me to finish whatever I may be doing and get to a place where I can dedicate the time and attention to your phone call.

4. Texting prevents the awkward social situations where you've said "Hi" to someone you didn't realize was on the phone.
And who of us a) hasn't done it and b) felt uncomfortable as hell afterwards? Okay, so maybe I am the only one that does it, but it's gotta be awkward even for the person on the phone. Plus, it's not a very private way to talk to someone; everyone around you can hear half the conversation. Imagine:

Woman on phone: Did you hear about the results?
(3 seconds)
Woman on phone: I know. She'll have to call everyone!
(4 seconds)
Woman on phone: It'll be contagious. They'll all get it!
(1 seconds)
Woman on phone: Okay, great. Tell her I said congratulations!

Okay. Was the woman talking about a girl who tested positive for an STI but was cured, a girl who is announcing a pregnancy, or a girl who just got accepted to college? It's not what you know, but what you don't know that can get you into trouble.

5. Texting saves your cell phone's battery.
Texting doesn't require as much as juice as talking. You'll get more time between charges if you text, saving you from having to scrounge for the nearest wall outlet you can swipe electricity from.

Ultimately, most of these are about respecting what the other person has going on in their lives. If you show them respect by not wasting their time with unnecessary phone calls, you can ensure both that they can get the important things done that they need to do, while still reserving the ability to get in contact with the person in an emergency. This is not meant to be a complete list; feel free to comment on why you prefer to call or text.

Monday, September 19, 2011

Sabotaging Growth

A recent blogger discusses the psychotic relationship the U.S. has with alcohol and marijuana. He accurately points out the disparity between campuses' zero tolerance policy on pot, while at the same time allowing or even encouraging the consumption of alcohol. His article includes examples from the University of Colorado campuses, who put their logo on products associated with alcohol consumption (I'm assuming he means beer and shot glasses).

Source: MEEB.com

The University of Alberta in Edmonton had "Beer Gardens." In the middle of their most massive courtyard, a fence is set up with three or four tents. You show ID (drinking age is 18, not 21 like the States), pay $5 a ticket, each ticket gets you a pint. The purpose is to celebrate the end of the semester, but I don't consider it much of a celebration if you're passed out and puking. There are two bars on campus (SUB and the Power Plant). The only good side to this? Public transportation is easily accessible from the school (includes its own subway stop), and there are a number of programs one can access if you end up too drunk to drive. Of course, Canada has a much more liberal point of view on pot than the U.S. does, so take it for what it's worth.

But the cognitive dissonance in the U.S. doesn't just stop there. It also extends into the realm of business. By refusing to allow families in the U.S. to grow pot legally for profit, the laws are forcing more people into poverty than is necessary. The U.S. is losing tax revenue, jobs, economic growth, and public safety because of its insistence that marijuana is a "dangerous" drug.

Dangerous? A recent story from the L.A. Times shows that prescription drugs are causing more deaths than motor vehicle accidents. Pot by itself has caused no deaths from overdose, something that cannot be said of alcohol. Of five deaths attributed to a pot overdose in Britain, all were found to be caused by accidental inhalation of vomit that could not be directly attributed to pot (DrugWarFacts.com).

President Obama and Speaker John Boehner both claim to want to put the U.S. back to work. But companies aren't hiring! So let people go into business for themselves. Take away the restrictions to grow pot for profit, and allow families to take their finances into their own hands. After all, this is a free country. Isn't it?

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Do The World A Favor: Hire Someone

The inspiration for this post: Columnist Opens His Last Unemployment Check

I've been listening for over three years now to the lame attacks and specious criticisms of those who are receiving some form of welfare, be it food stamps, unemployment, Social Security, disability, you name it. The perception is that these people are fakes, liars, and slackers who are only interested in gaming the system and deriving as much benefit with as little input as possible. This conceals a very crucial but ignored fact of life:

Source: PhiladelphiaAttorney.com

Those critics are afraid to admit to themselves that the same thing could happen to them, and they would probably make the same decisions. By telling people to "pick themselves up by the bootstraps," they can more easily fool themselves into believing that they have any control over their income level. Do you have a boss? Then you don't control your paycheck; you are living, working, eating, and sleeping in a bed because of someone else's goodwill. Someone else had to do you the favor of taking a chance in hiring you. Now you turn around and tell others that it's their fault they can't find a job.

Do the world a favor: hire someone. Until you are directly the cause of someone else's employment, shut up and get back to your oh-so-secure job. If you aren't willing to give someone else a job, then you know exactly why people are unemployed and are part of the problem.

To the unemployed: Don't wait for someone else to hire you. Start your own business. Use your creativity, your skills, your life-experience to start a business. If you've worked at all, you know where there are places that companies are missing, marketing opportunities that are being overlooked, either because they are cost-effective enough or because of corporate politics. Ignore it, and ignore the naysayers who think you are foolish. Getting even 5 bucks a week starting your own business is better than nothing. I used to love playing Lemonade Tycoon. The principle is the same; sell people something for more than it costs you to produce.

Until those two conditions are met at the same time, can we just stop with all the judgments? The critics don't know the full story of the unemployed. I have yet to have someone listen to what's gone on in my life who didn't go, "Wow, no wonder your life sucks at the moment." But most people who are in my situation are the same. I'm not saying there aren't welfare cheats and liars and fraudsters out there, but there aren't enough of them to warrant all of us getting a bad wrap. Be compassionate, and recognize that while you sit on your high pedestal and snark at the people who are struggling just to get a meal, it wouldn't take much to topple that pedestal, and you might not even have any warning it's about to crumble.

Friday, September 16, 2011

We're Moving!

Yay! I'm so excited.

Valkyrie Falls is moving to its own website! *does the happy dance*

The new website will be www.valkyriefalls.com, and will go live October 1st. This website will stay up for a while, but won't be updated after the 1st.

Thanks so much for the people who have made this possible (you know who you are, I won't embarrass you).

Thursday, September 15, 2011

What Being An Atheist Does (And Does Not) Mean To Me

10 Myths About Atheists, Debunked?

My definition of an atheist: someone who does not believe in any form of deity (god or goddess). Nothing more, nothing less. Unfortunately, there is a lot of misunderstanding, so myths and assumptions abound. I intend to explore and explain a bit about my own version of atheism so people aren't so bound by their preconceptions.

There are no atheists in foxholes.

This is one myth that does need to be debunked, and I have anecdotal evidence of it. Back in 2006, my ex-husband (we'll call him Jack) and I were robbed at home at gunpoint. At one point, one of the robbers pushed on my back to get me down to the floor. There were two thoughts that went through my head:

1) Okay, this is it. I've studied about it in my feminist classes, and now I'm going to get raped. (I didn't.)

2) I really hope my cats don't run out the front door. (The robbers had left it open)

The cats didn't run away. They were under the bed the whole time, even after Jack and I were told to get into the bathroom and wait (a ploy to give the robbers time to escape). God never entered my mind. Not for a second.

Atheist don't have a moral code.

Also a ridiculous myth that needs to be debunked, and related to the idea that atheists have no concept of charity or altruism. The reality is that atheists are willing to admit that morality and altruism have little to do with the inherent goodness in people, and more to do with surviving in this world with minimal difficulty. Read "Superfreakonomics" for a very enlightening discussion on altruism and apathy.

I do not believe there is any form of true altruism. Even Mother Teresa, for all her good works, was still trying to get into heaven. Does this devalue what she did? Of course not, but let's not kid oursevles into thinking that anyone does something for zero gain. There is always gain, even if it's just the warm, fuzzy feeling you get after doing something nice. If you really weren't into the payoff, then why do you get pissed if someone doesn't thank you when you open a door for them? Atheists can have an understanding of the greater good despite not having an almighty Guy-In-The-Sky who dictates it to us. Don't kill, steal, lie? These seem like pretty easy morals to figure out on your own.

For the record, I volunteer to help garden at a local museum. Why? I'm having difficulty finding a job, and figure that spending six months helping older women cut roses might help me get a reference and at least shows I'm not sitting on my butt writing blogs all day. I also go to church and volunteer there; the personal gain there is mostly the warm fuzzies, but also networking.

Atheists don't believe in an afterlife

Also appears as: Atheist don't believe in a soul. Atheism is not nihilism--the negation of an aspect of life that is commonly considered to be meaningful, like morality, religion, or politics. My own judgment is that nihilists tend to believe in nothing; that nothing is meaningful, there is nothing after this life, etc. (Feel free to comment to correct me on this) Atheists aren't like that. I do believe in an afterlife, and I believe in reincarnation. Neither require a god. My afterlife is a huge library where I can spend eternity reading and learning, coming back to earth as many times as necessary to gain perspective. I don't understand why anyone thinks you can learn enough in one lifetime. It would be much more valuable to come back several times, experiencing the perspectives of male, female, black, white, Asian, tribal, rich, poor, starving, etc.

A word about death

My family has a rather unique perspective on death. For us, death is not an ending, simply a change of state, like a solid melting into a liquid. The essence is still there, still existing, it's just the shell that's gone. When people ask me how many siblings I have, I generally stutter. The truth is that I have three siblings - two sisters and a brother. But the two sisters are deceased. Doesn't make it any less true; I still have two sisters. Unfortunately, because our society has a weird discomfort with death, I generally don't mention my sisters, out of respect for other people's comfort levels. I'll talk about them to anyone who asks, and while I'm sad, I realize that I'm sad for myself, that I didn't have a chance to get to know them as they grew up, not sad for them because they are dead. Consider this my coping mechanism, instead of the idea that I'll meet my sisters again in some version of the Elysian Fields.

Atheists aren't educated about religion

Something that never ceases to amaze me is how little people assume atheists know about their religion. I've taken two university courses on the Bible and religion. I've practiced Ramadan, and celebrated Eid with the local Muslim community. I done some very cursory studies of Buddhism, Shinto, and Hinduism. For my personal beliefs, I've taken bits and pieces from them all and added in some of my own elements (see my version of the afterlife). Atheists are often very educated on religions; they have to be. When you're constantly confronted with "But the Bible says this!", you're only defense is to be more knowledgeable. Does it work? Sometimes, but usually not. The funny thing about beliefs is that people are very unwilling to change them, even when confronted with the text of their own religion.

Story time

Three women stood at the base a very tall mountain. One was a rather large woman, with no experience hiking. One was a mom who'd done some rock crawling in her younger days. The third was a very experienced climber. Each decided to set off on her own.

The large woman came upon a very easy trail, with a very slight incline. She couldn't see the other women, and thought to herself, "Wow! I've got the best trail! I'll be the first to reach the top!"

The mom came upon another trail, this one requiring a few jumps and a little bit of rock climbing. She was excited, and since she couldn't see the other women either, she thought to herself, "Wow! This trail is perfect! Surely I'll get to the summit first."

The climber came upon a sheer cliff. Her face lit up as she began scaling the wall. Like the other women, she couldn't see her partners, and thought to herself, "Awesome! This rockface is the best I've ever climbed! I'll get to the top in no time at all!"

When the climber reached the top, she was shocked. Each of the women arrived at the top at the exact same time, because each of the paths had slowed them down exactly the same, according to each woman's abilities.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Reasons For An Honest Relationship

Originally I was going to title this "Reasons For An Open Relationship", but the truth is, I want this advice to be applicable to more than just those who are looking up ways to negotiate bringing in a third (or fourth, or fifth) person into the bedroom. I honestly believe that there are traits that successful open relationships share that would also greatly benefit regular, two-person relationships.

Honesty
This is the biggest characteristic of any successful relationship, open, closed, or other. If you cannot be honest in admitting that you are attracted to someone else, then you should probably see a therapist, because I strongly suspect your lack of honesty with yourself is hindering you in other aspects of your life. You must also be honest with yourself in admitting what you aren't comfortable with. If you don't want to see your man kiss another woman, then say so, and have the confidence to walk away if he can't respect that. Likewise, you shouldn't have to worry about a five-minute tirade if your wife catches you giving a hottie the elevator look (you know, the up-and-down look guys give women).

PWYP (Practice What You Preach): My fiance and I were working on our rules about a year or so ago, when I developed a rather strong attraction to another man. We had already established that we could both sleep with other women (I'm bi, he's. . . well, male), but the question of me sleeping with other men hadn't really been ironed out. So I started pushing the issue, verbally only (I wasn't going to take any action until I was sure it wouldn't damage the relationship). For the most part, my questions were met with mumbling, usually some form of "Well, it's only fair, if I can sleep with other women." The lowered head, folded shoulders, and avoidance of eye-contact let me know he wasn't as comfortable with it as he made it sound. Eventually, he finally owned up to his discomfort, and we were able to define the rule we both could live with - I can watch another man whack off, but I can't touch him, and he can't touch me.

Communication
If honesty is the first key to a successful relationship, then communication of that honesty is certainly the second. This also requires a third key (confidence) that I'll discuss in a little bit. I'm not just talking communication of the "Hey honey, how was your day?" variety. That has its place as the marker of an interested spouse. But the communication I'm talking about is a little more in-depth. Both parties need to make sure they are understood properly, that the message is clear. The easiest way to do that is to ask your partner to describe to you what you've just said. Then you can best judge whether or not your partner has really gotten the message. The other part to communication is also providing that safe space for your partner to feel comfortable talking to you. If she feels like you're going to bite her head off every time she tries to discuss a certain topic, lines of communication will break down, and the relationship will suffer. You need to put your ego away for a bit so you can truly hear what the other person has to say, and then make any necessary adjustments.

PWYP: In my family, we often say something like, "I know this is going to sound wrong, but. . . " This little phrase signals many things: it lets the other person know the speaker isn't trying to be offensive, though what follows after the "but" might easily be taken that way; it signals everyone to put their egos away and work towards the goal of understanding what the speaker is trying to communicate; and it lets everyone know that the matter is important enough to bring up. This gives the speaker the space to say what she needs to say, without the fear of everyone jumping all over her before she can get the point across.

Confidence
Unfortunately, confidence is also a big part of both honesty and communication. You must have the confidence to speak up. You are worth it. If other people won't give you the space to speak up, then you need to just walk away. You are a valuable human being. You might be wrong, and you might be misunderstanding the situation, but you have a voice that deserves to be heard. The flip side to this: if you notice that your partner doesn't have much confidence, you should work with them to help encourage their confidence. A brow-beaten, dependent partner is someone you will have to babysit, and our time on earth is far too valuable for that. Your goal should be to have a relationship with your equal; that builds trust, makes communication easier, and allows for mutual respect.

PWYP: To help your partner build confidence, encourage him in his pursuits. Is he thinking about starting a new project, but not confident he can do it? Help him take classes, or suggest people he can talk to. However, there is a strong tendency (especially among women), to just do it for them. Don't. This does not build confidence; it sucks it out. By not trusting your partner to handle it, you are sabotaging their confidence. Does this mean that sometimes you'll be let down? Sure, but if you take the long view, the disappointment will be brief. If you really have a hard time believing your partner is capable of something, have a backup plan. That will give you the peace of mind while allowing your partner to develop her self-esteem.

Respect
The fourth and final key is respect. Simply put, respect is the treatment of the other person and the other person's needs as being equal to your own. Your wife might spend 15 hours a day staying home taking care of the kids, but you will destroy the relationship if you view her time as less valuable than yours. Likewise, if your husband states that he is not comfortable with something (say, spanking said kids), you must respect your partner's boundaries.

PWYP: This is more of an attitude than the other three keys, so it requires more of a mental game and the development of habits. Wake up every morning and ask, "How can I help my partner today?" This immediately sets you up in the mindset of valuing what your partner is doing and working towards. If your partner sets a boundary, then do not cross that boundary out of spite or "just because." Those are petty games that are more suitable for the sandbox than a mature, adult relationship.

A word about compromise/fairness
I'm not going to include compromise and fairness in this list, for two reasons. First, I strongly believe that if you practice the previous four keys, fairness and compromise will likely flow organically from it. Second, not everyone's definition of "fair" is the same, and that's something that needs to be ironed out between the members of the relationship. For example, is it fair to split the household chores 50/50? What if one person works 14 hour days and the other stays at home? Or only works 8 hours a day? Is it still fair? When you are honest about your own needs, can communicate those needs effectively, have the confidence to demand your needs, and can respect other people's needs, "fair" becomes so inherent that the word is more often used to describe the weather than your relationship.

Monday, September 12, 2011

Requirements For The Next President

These are the traits I want my next president to have:

1. Pro-choice

Let me be clear here, because I'm not just talking about abortion. I'm talking about the freedom to choose contraception, abortion, but also the freedom to NOT choose those things. The next president should actively support a culture that allows a woman to become pregnant when she wishes, provides the healthcare necessary to ensure her and her child's health, and supports her afterwards with a minimum of six-months paid maternity leave and an assistant who comes in once a week to help the new mom with breastfeeding, making meals, doing laundry, and running other errands, so Mom can focus on her child. I'm also talking about the freedom to give birth outside of a hospital, without the threat of jail time or losing her child. Think I'm kidding? Check out this site (Advocates For Pregnant Women) which describes a hospital that obtained a court order to force a mother to have a c-section because the child was supposedly too large.

2. FairTax

The next president should focus on getting the FairTax passed. This tax will abolish the IRS, repeal all current taxes, and replace them with a 23% sales tax on all new goods and services. This will cause companies in the U.S. to have a 0% tax burden on exports - something no other country can compete with. It will give Americans 100% of their paychecks to spend as they please, allowing them the freedom to decide just how much in taxes they want to contribute to the U.S. government. It would cause Medicare and Social Security to be funded by every person who spends money in the U.S., including tourists. It expands the tax base to everyone, thus creating equality across the board. It also provides prebates - a monthly government check that covers the cost of taxes on necessities, like food and healthcare, while still allowing those who purchase more of those items than is necessary to contribute to those programs. This is just the start of the benefits the FairTax offers, with little to no reduction in current revenue levels. Want more information? Please check out FairTax.org.

3. Online K-12

The next president will recognize the value of online K-12. By supporting this service, billions of dollars could be saved by reducing wear and tear on current classrooms, requiring fewer teachers, and ensuring that kids get the tailored education they need at the pace they can best absorb it.

And those are just the direct benefits. Education is one of the three main causes of the housing crisis. By freeing good education from the boundaries of school districts, families will be able to choose the houses they can afford, instead of purchasing the largest house their income can buy because it's in the best neighborhood. For information on free, public online education in your state, you can visit K12.com.

This is just the beginning. I suspect this list will expand as I do further research into various other issues (immigration, military, etc.).

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Bolivia, Mother Earth, and Unintended Consequences

Bolivia is set to pass legislation that will confer the same rights as humans to Mother Nature. The law is called la Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra.

I believe that not only will this legislation fail to produce its intended aim (greater conservation and respect for natural resources), but will actually produce a negative economic and environmental impact. The reason: unintended consequences.

Unintended consequences are the red-headed stepchildren of economics. They are the "unknown unknowns" that lurk around the corner from "good intention," and are directly related to "bad execution."

What unintended consequences do I believe will occur?

First - A massive drain on public resources as police, lawyers, and jails attempt to negotiate how to prosecute such "crimes against Nature." I'm sure we can all agree that it is extremely beneficial to society to protect a local water resource from pollution, be the source an aquifer, stream, ocean, or lake. However, does a squirrel have the same right to life as a human? If you run over a squirrel while driving, should you be charged with vehicular manslaughter?

Should airlines who are responsible for the death of flocks of birds be held criminally accountable? Without a doubt the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico caused unquantifiable costs to both economic and environmental resources, but should the death of an ant hold the same the penalties?

And we aren't limited to animals in the potential consequences either. If I harvest a crop and kill it to feed my family, have I committed murder? The law seems to suggest so, though I doubt in practice anyone will actually be put on trial for the death of a carrot. But there will be significant costs to the taxpayers in Bolivia while the government figures out what is worth prosecuting and what isn't.

Second - what does it mean when Mother Nature has better rights than humans? You may think I'm a little off to ask this question, but look carefully at what the rights the law says it confers to Mother Nature:

...the right to life and to exist; the right to continue vital cycles and processes free from human alteration; the right to pure water and clean air; the right to balance; the right not to be polluted; and the right to not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered. Perhaps the most controversial point is the right "to not be affected by mega-infrastructure and development projects that affect the balance of ecosystems and the local inhabitant communities".

The Declaration of Independence in the United States acknowledges the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. But the rights outlined here are not afforded to humans in the United States, and I suspect (though granted, I do not know for sure) that humans in Bolivia are treated similarly. Humans do not have the right to continue "vital cycles" - the massive increase in caesarean sections shows how Western culture has interfered with normal, physiological processes. Humans do not have the right to not be polluted - test any water anywhere in the world (yes, even Antarctica) and you will find trace amounts of antibiotics. The right not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered? Here come the eugenics and social arguments and quests for selective abortions, either in pursuit of a male heir or to avoid a genetic abnormality.

Bolivia is actually giving Mother Nature more rights than humans have. I don't know about you, but I'd be a little outraged if an ant got better treatment under the law than I did.

For these two reasons (and possibly others that I haven't thought of), I believe the new legislation in Bolivia is doomed to failure, but I do have an alternative solution: government officials should meet with religious officials and encourage them to teach environmental conservation to their congregations.

"Church and state, church and state!" I can already here the screams. No money, favors, or other incentives should be allowed to exchange hands, and the meetings should be completely visible, transparent, and able to be attended by the public. A panel of government officials, religious leaders from various faiths, and community leaders should meet to discuss various needs that exist in the community and how to address them. By recognizing the the legal system is not always the best way to alter people's behavior, leaders can open themselves to new solutions. If the necessary action does truly benefit the largest number of people, the leaders will jump on it. If it is simply a "special interest" that only protects a few, then the talks will fall apart into petty bickering over small details (see current U.S. politics and discussions over the budget for a good example).

I won't exclude the possibility that there still could be petty bickering. A Jew might well refuse to sit at a panel with an anti-Semite, but if the greater good would be served, both parties would likely cave to peer pressure, so long as the citizens kept up the pressure (a very key point - all social programs, religious or governmental, will be dead on arrival without pressure and cooperation from the public).

What would happen if it became a sin to not practice good environmental husbandry? There's plenty of precedent. The Bible's first commandment is to be fruitful and multiply. The second? "To replenish the earth" (KJV, Genesis 1:28). Not only that, but by encouraging environmental conservation through religion, no taxpayer would be forced to bear the burden of a government program that could criminalize survival.

People respond to incentives. While Bolivia has acknowledged that environmental conservation is a social need, enforcing such a need on a criminal basis will end up costing the government far too much for far too little gain. Instead, the government should recognize the impact of religious motivation and peer pressure and work with religious leaders to encourage people to preserve their resources.

After all, isn't one of the benefits of religion that we behave in the best interests of all? What greater interest does any human have than in the good husbandry of natural resources.

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Why Walt Disney Is Responsible For Your Income Tax Withholding

In 1943, the United States Treasury Department sponsored this short animation by Walt Disney in an effort to make the idea of income tax withholdings. Previously, income tax withholdings were a hard sell to the U.S. public, due to the fact that the money was being taken out of citizens' paychecks before they even saw it, encouraging the earner to be blind to both their actual earnings (as opposed to take-home pay) and their actual tax burden (as opposed to the refund/payment situation).

37% of Americans polled felt this cartoon had a positive effect on their attitude toward paying their income taxes.

Here is the cartoon:



If you're having trouble with the Youtube video, try this link to Metatube.com.

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

News, news and more news

Hey readers!

Things have slowed down a bit over here. The school semester started, plus I have several other projects I'm working on, one of which will be announced probably in the next two weeks and directly affects this blog (I'm so excited, I hope you will be too!).

I have a few blog posts planned, but they are requiring a bit more research than my usual fare, so be patient with me and I'll have some good reading for you soon.

Take care!
B. Littlefield

Saturday, September 3, 2011

Homosexuality And Cultural Adaptability

An Orthodox rabbi has started a matchmaking services for gay men and women who are seeking to fulfill the Jewish requirement of having children:

I applaud Rabbi Harel's efforts in bringing his Orthodox Jewish culture and modern-day concerns on homosexuality together. His matchmaking service is just another example of how cultures can and will adapt to those who express gender a little differently.

Source: Yahoo!

While we're discussing gender, let's get something clear: a person's "sex" is between their legs, while a person's "gender" is between their ears. Gender is a social role to be played, not a physical characteristic.

Throughout history, cultures have adapted to accommodate differently-gendered folk. For example:
- Two-Spirit (Native American)
- Hijra (South Asia)
- Fa'afafine (Polynesia)
- Sworn Virgins (Balkans)

Each of these alternate genders had very specific roles in their cultures, and very specific rules they had to follow. Oftentimes, a shortage of one sex or the other will cause the emergence of a third gender (such as in the case of the Fa'afafine and the Sworn Virgins), either by the choice of the parents or the child. Many Fa'afafine consider their role to be an honor, and even though their sexual expression is male, because they are a third gender, they are not considered to be homosexuals, even when they pursue relationships with men or other Fa'afafine.

The rabbi is simply doing the same thing; adapting his culture to meet the needs of those who cannot follow traditional gender roles.

I also particularly like this quote about the Rabbi's views of gays continuing to date outside the marriage:
Harel said as long as both parties are aware the other is dating, it would not be adultery in such a union. He said the same would not be true for a straight couple because they are sexually compatible and have no reason to look elsewhere. Jewish law forbids adultery.

For me personally, adultery has always required an element of deception. I believe strongly that the core of adultery is neglect; the person cheating is the person whose needs are not being met. Thus, to avoid getting cheated on, one must do two things:

1) Be responsive and mindful of the other person's needs in the relationship

2) Be communicative with their partner about what's going on in their life, and if there is someone who they are feeling attracted to.

My bottom line definition of cheating: If you wouldn't tell your partner about it, you're cheating. It's the queasiness, the excitement, the thrill of doing something you're not supposed to, that puts the spice into cheating that might not be there otherwise. If you tell your partner you're going out for coffee with someone else, the "forbidden fruit" syndrome is side-stepped. If you are mindful of the other person's needs, there is less of at temptation to seek fulfillment elsewhere.

Source: The Solipsistic Me

Rabbi Harel's adaptation is very similar, as he acknowledges that gay males and females who are married to each other may not be sexual compatible. In this case, a need exists that the other partner is incapable of providing. This is no different than a bi woman who is in a relationship with a male who asks to see another woman. It's not that the guy isn't "man" enough, it's that he's not "woman" enough. To attempt to force either party into monogamy seems to create more problems than it would solve.

The only caveat: If you're going to sleep outside of the relationship, keep your partner safe. What do I mean by this? Use protection. There is no way you can justify sleeping with other people if you're risking your partner's life in the process. Caution is certainly prudent; one suggestion is to make sure all parties involved have negative STI tests that are at least 6 months apart, as well as using protection. I have no idea what the Orthodox Jewish stance is on barrier contraceptive methods, so I don't know what Rabbi Harel would advise. Any Jewish readers, please feel free to comment.

Western culture is actually the exception, not the rule, when it comes to roles for the Alphabet Soup. I suspect this is why the gay community is so vocal; we have no purpose socially. A safe, constructive, positive outlet for alternate gender identities would ease tensions between the gay community and those who would oppress it. There would be clear role-models, clear expectations. Yes, of course there would be those who still wouldn't follow the rules; there's a place for them too. But it is the lack of a place for Alphabet Soup members that is creating a flashpoint, as we try to take over space that has been occupied in the past by an Abrahamic-centric, homophobic culture.

The results are not pretty. Matthew Shepard and Brandon Teena can attest to that. While I acknowledge that Rabbi Harel's solution isn't ideal, it represents an acknowledgement of inborn characteristic of alternate identities. We cannot help who we are; at least help us find a place where we can be. The gay community has been lobbying hard to receive the simplest, most basic of human rights - the acknowledgement that I exist. Thank you, Rabbi Harel, for that acknowledgement.

Thursday, September 1, 2011

Follow-Up: Media Gets It Right 2

Previous post: Media Finally Gets One Right

Seriously, every member of Alphabet Soup (LGBTQRXYZ) needs to have a mom like this: Cher defends son Chaz against critics.

Source: Yahoo!

My favorite:
"Mothers don't stop Getting angry with stupid bigots who (mess) with their children!" the 65-year-old singer wrote.

Awesome. So full of win. WTG Cher for being probably the most famous parent of a trans person, and what a time for it! Just when news can travel around the world in a heartbeat, this woman has the opportunity to show how powerful love can be.

Don't mess with my kid. What an incredibly powerful statement, and one that cuts across all borders, all political, religious, economic divisions. Don't mess with my kid, and instantly every mother can relate. Bravo, Cher! And nicely done, Chaz!

Remind your kids to be tolerant of one another when you send them off to school. Practice a little more compassion in your life, because at heart, we all want the same things: don't mess with our children.