Gina Harris's Blog, page 17

The frustrating consistency of the New York Times

The New York Times is never getting any of my money.

That may not be enough of a boycott, as I am still playing their free word games. 

Playing without subscribing means that I don't have access to the archives and I get cut off at odd moments with Spelling Bee, but there is no way I am going to subscribe.

(My understanding -- at least for how things used to be -- is that the real money for a paper is in ads, but a large subscriber base makes selling ads easier and more lucrative. I am seeing their ads, but on the games the ads all seem to be for subscribing.)

For now I am letting my need for brainteasers keep me returning to the page, but not subscribing, for which you are welcome to judge me. Otherwise, you may be thinking that this is a Friday post, when I write about my reading or media on various themes, whereas this seems more related to the previous post about boycotting.

It turns out this particular newspaper has played a recurring role in my reading.

The first book was definitely Been in the Storm So Long: The Aftermath of Slavery by Leon F. Litwack. 

It was the first related book, but I had already seen many examples on Twitter of how the Times -- despite being viewed as liberal -- gave special treatment to Donald Trump, apparently in the interest of maintaining access. 

There is a pretty good parody account, https://x.com/dougjballoon?lang=en. It hasn't been quite as funny over the last three weeks, but I sympathize with that.

When reporters had important information, but saved it for their books rather than, you know, reporting news, it showed up as part of a pattern. I was thinking that was something about today's New York Times.

Then I read the book.

I read it in 2019, but it had been published in 1979 and was about the period just after the Civil War.

In it, Litwick quotes New York Times articles about the conflict between former masters and slaves. 

I was so appalled by the writing that I put seven fairly lengthy quotes in my Goodreads review:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/52557299

They weren't all from the Times, but I remember seeing the quotes from the Times and thinking "Oh, even then."

A few years later I got to reading No One Helped: Kitty Genovese, New York City, and the Myth of Urban Apathy by Marcia M. Gallo, as well as watching The Witness documentary, about the same murder. 

The Times did an amazing job of ignoring some facts and distorting others to tell the story that they wanted to tell, even though it was false. 

They made a huge impression with that story. They lied to do so, though they probably didn't think of it as lying and the brutal incompetence of the police helped.

In October I finished Buried By the Times: The Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper by Laurel Leff. 

In this case it appears that their motivation for downplaying the Holocaust was not wanting to appear too Jewish. I am not sure that's a good reason.

I want to say "finally", but I am afraid there will be more. So, most recently, I am reading about AIDS and how the Times buried coverage of that. That's coming up in multiple books.

A lack of knowledge can kill people.

I have a feeling that if I delved more into their coverage of Vietnam or COVID or various other issues going back to their founding in 1851, I would continue to find bias toward power and not enough commitment to truth and accuracy. That doesn't seem to change whether it is being led by A.M. Rosenthal or Arthur Sulzberger or Joseph Kahn.

There is a bigger issue that affects a lot of media and the possibility of getting good information. I do want to explore that more. 

For now all I can really do is assert that my money will never go to the New York Times. Ever.

Related posts:

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-failure-of-press.html

https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2023/10/aid-or-apathy.html

https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2023/05/getting-to-two-things-about-grief.html

  

Boycotting

Another thing causing Trump voter tears is the realization that the "Obamacare" slated for destruction is the same Affordable Care Act that has required coverage of preexisting conditions.

I literally saw someone reply on that issue that Obama should not have branded it as "Obamacare":

https://x.com/KurtsViews/status/1859274662808834476 

President Obama did not do that. The Tea Party called it that to turn people against it. The press went along with it, but it worked because of racism (and dominator culture).

So, yes, I think some naming, blaming, and shaming is in order for the lies, the ignorance, and the bigotry. While I do not aim to be cruel or hateful, there is going to be some real discomfort for people coming to grips with the harm they have done, and that is necessary.

It may also involve unemployment.

Today's post is inspired by some conversations about canceling subscriptions to The Washington Post after owner Jeff Bezos did not allow them to print an endorsement for Harris. At least 250,000 people canceled. That is higher than their total number of print subscriptions, though their digital base is larger.

They were not the only paper to do so. The Gannett- (also USA Today and some large Florida papers) owned Detroit Free Press did not offer an endorsement, though Michigan and Detroit were important areas. The billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Times, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, also withheld an endorsement. 

There have definitely been people canceling their LA Times subscriptions. I have not seen any numbers on Detroit Free Press cancellations, but I have seen notices that you can't cancel without calling and giving the number, so it at least seems like people have been looking into it.

(The New York Times endorsed ending the Trump era without ever mentioning Harris by name or acknowledging any of her accomplishments, but I will get to them tomorrow.)

There is a lot of room for media blame, but I have only seen The Washington Post getting defenders saying that it will hurt the people who work there without hurting Bezos.

You will hear from time to time that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. There are ways in which that is true. 

Personally, I have decided that I don't ever need to buy from Amazon again. Looking at KN95 masks, I did find another source: Wal-Mart. Big improvement! I guess it's better because as far as I know the Walton family does not own any media sources.

I also sometimes think about writing books again. I do not know an equivalent platform for self-publishing to Kindle Direct Publishing. A lot of the charities and people in need I know use Amazon wish lists. I get that there are complications; but this is a choice that feels right to me, so I am sticking to it.

It may not be right for everyone. What we are certainly not going to do is try and force people who rely on those deliveries and prices to uphold your ethics. You make moral choices for yourself, based on your beliefs and resources. Trying to make everyone else conform is dominator culture again.

Writing about boundaries yesterday, the primary deciding factor in ending contact has not been about causing hurt to the other person, but about giving myself protection and peace. It might hurt them -- and no, I generally don't find that to be a bonus -- but the priority is my well-being.

So, cancelling subscriptions to a news source that is manipulated by a billionaire may in fact hurt people who don't make very much money and might not be terrible people. 

There have been people who have resigned in protest, or written things that could get them fired. That is their principled stand. 

There are also people who have stood by as journalists of color have been cut, or not allowed to write on issues that they knew best because they were considered biased, and accepted that. Maybe it is okay if some of them lose their jobs. 

It is certainly not required that you pay for the continued production of this billionaire-biased publication.

Will it hurt Jeff Bezos financially? I am not sure that is even possible. That's one of the worst dilemmas of the massive consolidation of wealth that characterizes our time. Not only does it squeeze more and more people more tightly in the bottom, it makes it very difficult to exert any pressure against those in power.

However, for all the things that they have, billionaires have remarkably fragile egos. A lot of people unsubscribing might hurt his pride.

I actually would consider that a bonus, if not a primary motivation.

Setting boundaries (before Thanksgiving!)

Something yesterday made me feel a need to post things that can make people smile and show support. Going over my list of things that can help, one of the big ones was "Don't hate."

I am also incredibly angry. I want to get things out about that, except I appear to have written most of it before; I am just angrier now.

What I was trying to draft was a refutation of all of the wrong reasons people have been giving for the election results. People are wrong and lying and that needs to be refuted. It was getting so long and unwieldy, though, that I think I need to take a step back.

My core feeling is that as important as it is to love people, it does not mean overlooking.

Harm has been done and more harm will follow. Many of the people who are a part of that harm are clinging to illusions about how it was a principled choice or for a valid reason or not destructive. 

Those bubbles need to be popped.

Again, there is a lot to write there, but for now, let's focus on navigating the relationships .

Interestingly, there is some remarkably early buyers' remorse among Trump voters. 

One reason is the proposed evisceration of the Department of Education. Parents of students with IEPs and the teachers who work with those students are starting to realize that department is the source of their funding. 

Oops.

Also, we have people crying about family cutting them off because of how they voted. They knew how their families felt, apparently, but did not believe there would be a penalty.

You may have people you care for who have been hateful or ignorant (or both), but they are coming to you now feeling sad or scared. What do you do?

That is a very personal decision. For Thanksgiving specifically, it is also probably a somewhat joint decision. 

I can give some things to think about.

This may be somewhat influenced by reading On Repentance and Repair: Making Amends in an Unapologetic World by Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg. While there were things that I did not think were completely right, it was still refreshing to see a hope in reconciliation and a focus on the work.

I am also thinking about my own boundaries, and how people who have been very abusive have come back with no apologies.

It's not that I was waiting for an apology, but when someone who has treated you badly wants to act like nothing happened, that sets a clear expectation that treating you badly is still on the table. 

You don't have to make room in your life for mistreatment. 

Am I equating voting for Trump (or a third party) to personal mistreatment? 

Does dehumanizing people other than you and siding with fascism make people kinder?

Again, it's personal. For me it is also informed by it feeling more and more like a matter of integrity to make sure everyone knows how and why they are wrong. That may not be well-received, but it could ultimately be instrumental for their integrity.

Love can mean saying "no". It absolutely does not mean never having to say you're sorry.

And if you find that your family or community are harmful to you -- whether that is physical or mental, whether it is intentional on their part or not -- do not be afraid to build new family and community. 

We are going to need it.

 

Related posts:

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2016/06/borders-and-boundaries.html  

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2022/10/on-paternal-side.html 

https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2019/02/slowing-down-forgiveness.html 

Changing plans

Here is an example of how the election has changed my plans.

I have written before about understanding the complications of US-Israel relations and how that affects our ability to stop the genocide in Palestine. Sure, part of that is not enough will, and influencing Netanyahu doesn't seem to be possible, but what about no longer supplying weapons?

My plan was to research the arms agreements that we have with Israel; what conditions are there? When does it expire and need renewal? Then build on that, writing to legislators and maybe put a petition on whitehouse.gov. 

I have never said this administration is perfect, but I believe that it contains fundamentally decent people who want to do good things. Ending inertia is hard, but there are people who can be more willing.

I have so little hope in the incoming administration.

Initially my only thought for helping anyone in Gaza now, post-election, is getting them out. Sadly, that takes money, something on which I am very short.

I am not the only one in that position. The mass consolidation of wealth into the hands of a few, pretty terrible people, is not helpful for the good things that we might want to do.

However, if you have some, here is a spreadsheet of different fundraisers for people in Gaza:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-DDMFyn-ttboPXrz1bB3MFk7BlzCwfugh4259Wh7U1s/htmlview

I have gotten a tiny bit more optimism, remembering that Israel does not get arms only from the United States.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%27s_arms_supplier_countries  

Some of those countries may be more open to influence. 

Actually, when I was writing letters in Amnesty International, they never had people write to their own governments, because there were countries where that was much more dangerous.

That has been one thing with reading about various countries in Latin America: governments can be much worse. Of course, we often had an influence on that oppression, and ours is about to get much worse.

Maybe some countries can be influenced. 

Maybe Israeli people can be influenced so that they turn against Netanyahu. Some already are against him, and he is pretty corrupt which can make the mere will of the people ineffective, but maybe.

It is worth noting that we have really made things worse, and many people are lying to themselves about that in various ways.

I see a need to write more things that can be hopeful and helpful, but also to cut through lies.

The increased posting may have to continue for a while.

Related posts:

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2024/10/election-2024-some-thoughts-on-bidens.html  

https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2023/10/palestine.html 

https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2023/10/complicating-factors.html 

Thinking of the children -- Pride 2024

For the rest of my reading, it mostly breaks down into two sections (with some overlap).

One area is activism, which I hope to write about that next week. I hope that I can learn things that will be helpful now.

The other part seems to start with empathy -- reading about people with different experiences should lead to increased empathy, so that tracks -- but then it seems to turn into being protective.

There's still a lot of overlap. 

I already mentioned When We Rise by Cleve Jones. He has primarily been an activist, so most of his memoir is about that. Several of the things I have jotted down for further research came from his book. However, the part of his book that has stayed with me the most was reading that as a teenager he had a stash of pills set aside for when it became unbearable; he gave them up when he found a magazine talking about other gay people.

He was not the only one who envisioned suicide. Others actually attempted. 

After all, regardless of what they knew was available, as children most of them had some difficulty fitting in and were punished for that, by contemporaries if not by family. 

Here are the rest of the memoirs, two of which were cited last week:

In the Form of a Question: The Joys and Rewards of a Curious Life by Amy Schneider
Ten Steps to Nanette by Hannah Gadsby
The Boy Beneath My Skin: A Black Trans Man Living in the South by Charley Burton
The Risk it Takes to Bloom: On Life and Liberation by Raquel Willis
Close to the Knives: A Memoir of Disintegration by David Wojnarowicz

For the record, my favorite was Ten Steps to Nanette. Gadsby's recounting of her life and the analysis of how it created her comedy special was really insightful and interesting. I also liked The Risk it Takes to Bloom very much.

The Boy Beneath My Skin was really rambling and repetitive. It had unique elements, like some symptoms in early life that sounded like schizophrenia and also addiction that had much of his journey correlating to 12-step programs. There was untapped potential there.

Close to the Knives was the least traditional memoir. What really stayed with me is that he deals closely with two deaths. During that time he is ill as well, but it seems like he isn't, like maybe he was going to be one of the survivors. He died a year after its publication.

I didn't enjoy Amy Schneider's book as much as I thought I would, but I still learned from it.

And still, very consistently, there is bullying. 

Very frequently there is molestation. I would speculate about how there being a part of themselves that they feel they need to hide leaves them more vulnerable, but honestly sometimes molestation just seems really common regardless of orientation or upbringing; what is the deal with that?

As they get older, where they are at the age of consent, there are still situations that sit wrong as they are manipulated or fetishized, most noticeably with the Black transgender people. What is the deal with that?

Beyond this reading, it is not uncommon that you will see big age gaps in queer relationships. That is not automatically predatory, but it's a thing that happens. 

I think it happens more easily because the stigma on talking about queer relationships at all prevents talking about how to have healthy relationships.

To be fair, that is not limited to queer people. We see big protests about any sex education for children -- even though that largely focuses on being able to recognize and seek help for being sexually abused -- because of an apparent reluctance to tell children that their body belongs to them and they don't have to allow abuse. I mean, where would that stop?

Therefore, so much of the focus on danger to children focuses on drag queens, when the actual abuse cases over and over again are relatives, youth pastors, scout leaders, and people on set for kids in show business.

I know some people have a really hard time accepting that queer people exist and that can be okay, but my question is whether we can realize that this denial is harmful to many people, including many children. 

Bigotry can only cause harm.

We're in for a long string of lessons on how wishing harm to others will spread beyond our desires, but that specific lesson on child safety has been around for a while. Let's learn it.

One of the most interesting things was reading a small bio of Sylvia Rivera. 

I had read about a tendency on her part to make false claims about some of her actions, so had some skepticism. 

I had not known about her father abandoning her when young and her mother committing suicide when Sylvia was three. I had not known that she left home at ten, partly because of the disapproval she faced. 

(And that was after reading another book on her, which was a children's book, but seems like it could have been more informative. Fairy tales have children orphaned and on their own.)

That is so young to be fending for yourself. I could see how there might be some grandiosity and confusion. She did real work, and maybe it did not feel like enough. I just know that the more I learn, the more compassion I feel.

I want us to do better for all of the children.

Hispanic Star en espagnol: Sylvia Rivera by Claudia Romo Edelman and J. Gia Loving

Sylvia Rivera (Leaders Like Us) by Kaitlyn Duling

There was one book that was really disappointing.

My New Gender Workbook by Kate Bornstein

It had been on my radar for several years, and then it occurred to me that it would fit in here. 

I was expecting that I would regret writing about my gender before reading it. Nope. It is too cutesy and scandalous and daring, all of which made it really aggravating for me.

That is a shame, because it can be really hard figuring it out. There are better resources and role models out there now, but we still have a ways to go.

I want people to have resources. I may not be the best source for some help, but if you see an opportunity to help, take it.

Need is only going up.

Bracelets

It is now time to apply that thinking about emotion and fear and practicality to the bracelets.

First, after the horror of another election became clear, there were many terrible feelings of fear, disappointment, anger and sadness. Completely understandable.

Then, apparently, some white women started to worry that they would be perceived as Trump voters. It's gross, but understandable. 

https://x.com/flossymaetacket/status/1854970291115704630/photo/1 

Apparently white women voting for Trump only dropped by one percentage point, and we are 37% of the electorate. The split was 53% of white women voting for Trump and 45% for Harris, despite the overturning of Roe largely made possible by Trump's Supreme Court picks... it makes us look like slow learners.

I am not sure of the order in which everything happened. There were definitely TikTok videos suggesting making blue friendship bracelets to show support, but then it looks like there were kits and ready-made bracelets marketed.

(Apparently there is also a call for shaving heads, but emulating skinheads seems like a weird way to stand against white supremacy.)

It made me think of the 2017 Women's March, where the predominant symbol became something representing white womanhood, where the presidential candidate who had taken the hits was ignored, and where they cut off a Black trans woman in the middle of her speech in their rush to get to the Indigo Girls.

It also reminded me of the conversations around #MeToo where men would keep chiming in with "Not all men!" Their focus on themselves and their hurt feelings prevented them from hearing what they needed to hear and work toward solutions.

"Not all white people", "not all white women"... not helpful.

Support can be shown with visible symbols. There are things like Orange Shirt Day and Red Dress Day. They may work to raise awareness, and as personal reminders, but they are hollow without additional action.

This is where spending some time on intent and desire can be helpful.

If we want to show marginalized people that we are safe, a bracelet is not going to do that. If it did actually become a symbol people trusted, you would see people wearing it with bad intent to get opportunities for harm.

If the people around you don't know whom you are safe for, why don't they know?

That is our looking inward. Do we let things go to avoid making waves? Are we unintentionally committing microaggressions? Certainty that you are "one of the good ones" is a great way to not actually be that good.

Are we listening? I found out about the bracelets because I saw Black women criticizing them; are you listening to people that do not look like you? 

Besides, should the key goal be making sure people recognize your goodness? Or should we be trying to reduce harm?

That's a harder task, but a better one.

These are terrible times. Easy symbols are not going to fix that. 

Cycling through the fears

Drawing fills some needs, while blogging and journal writing some other needs, but there are also times when I really need to make lists. I often type lists or make spreadsheets, but sometimes I really need to be able to write them.

Therefore, I am also working on this page where I write down different problems I expect in the wake of this election, along with things that might be helpful, and then potential problems with the solutions.

Allow me to give some examples. This will be three topics out of many.

Trump has promised mass deportations and Stephen Miller has promised to "turbocharge" denaturalization -- stripping citizens of their status.

https://theimmigrationhub.org/press/gop-plans-to-turbocharge-trumps-denaturalization-project-threaten-the-nations-core-values/ 

My mother has been a citizen since 1967. I don't even know if she will live past the inauguration and it's unlikely they will target old people in memory care. Still, there is a personal level on which that offends me.

That one won't probably hurt my family directly. There are other problems.

Although they say they are focusing on criminals, Ana Navarro has correctly pointed out that there are not enough "criminals" to provide those numbers, probably meaning family members who are citizens getting caught up. That means not just DACA recipients, but children born here.

In addition, last time around, because of the sweeping and racist nature of the roundups, occasionally citizens got swept up. It was surprisingly hard to get extricated once that happened.

https://revealnews.org/article/u-s-citizens-caught-up-in-immigration-sweeps/ 

Why, yes, the common factor in the people being rounded up -- with official status or not -- was skin color. That is the real reason it probably won't affect my mother, but she does have an accent and she lapses into Italian more frequently now. People often assume it is Spanish. 

She is probably still safe, but I have neighbors that could affect. It probably won't here in liberal Oregon, but it is still disturbing.

Then there will be the effect on business, which could affect food availability and will certainly affect GDP (and adds to the possibility of that dreaded inflation).

https://cmsny.org/how-trump-mass-deportation-plan-would-hurt-usa/ 

There is a sort of cycling through in the process: this part won't affect me, these parts probably won't but there is a real rage associated with this possibility, and this part will almost certainly affect me.

That is not to determine that things that don't affect me are not problems. What I hope it does is give me a better idea of where to take action, what needs more research, and what can go on the back burner. Maybe there is still fear, but ideally it is not panic, becoming more practical.

Here's another one.

Based on how many women are getting messages now about ownership, being murderers, and looking forward to the loss of their rights, I cannot help but think that sexual harassment and rape will be increasing. 

There could be a really long post on this, and that may happen. I just want to do a short mention now that perhaps it is time for more self-defense classes, or maybe I should get some pepper spray. I don't leave the house much, but it might be good to have on hand.

This is a very minor potential solution, but it brings up two problems right away. I remember reading about a woman who had taken self-defense training. They taught her to gouge eyeballs, but in the moment she could not bear the thought of the eyeballs falling onto her.

That may sound silly (and gross), but if you are gearing up to hurt someone, can you execute it? Would you be able to react quickly enough and follow through? Sometimes that requires drilling. 

Also, the other problem it brings up is that when women defend themselves they end up being charged a lot, almost as if even now their rights are not as fully respected.

Finally, this is a stressful time, and I already had a high stress load. That often affects sleep, which is not good for my blood sugar. I also overproduce a specific type of white blood cells, eosinophils. It's at a low level, but it is there and it seems to be stress-based because all of the other potential causes tested negative. These are the kind of things that wear your body down at a faster rate, so it may be shortening my life at a faster rate than before.

That is a reason to try and do things for stress reduction, and I can set goals with that. I do have a tendency to prioritize other things and other people, and that is not always wrong. Clearly there are people who are in more danger than me. 

There will be times when working against injustice or defending someone is more important than my white blood cell count, but I should understand that choice so I know what I am choosing.

Does this process calm me? I think it helps somewhat. It's my default, whether it helps or not.

With the art, feel your fears and your anger and sadness, but don't stop at feeling them. It is a starting place, not a stopping place.

Also, notice how it cycles, where I am looking at myself, and at my neighbors, and at the Gross Domestic Product, and thinking about other women, but also back to my health. De-centering is important, but sometimes centering is important too. Balance is hard, so sometimes the workaround is to rotate, looking inward, then outward, and then repeating.

Honestly, inappropriate centering is a big part of the problem with the bracelets. That's what we are going to look at tomorrow. 

Art therapy

A few days ago I posted about this bracelet idea from TikTok, which is a topic unto itself. 

As the discussion took shape -- along with other discussions -- the persistent theme was that people are feeling a lot of emotions and an urge to do something. That's all very reasonable, but the strong emotion and the sense of urgency is not necessarily great for planning. I had an idea and posted this:

This is what I think would be a great way to channel some of that anger and grief and fear: make some art with it this weekend. It can be poetry, song, drawing, photography -- there are so many ways to express yourself. You don't have to share, but if you want to please do.

I will too.

I drew this:

This is art therapy, not really art for art's sake and certainly not commercial. I mention that for two reasons:

It doesn't matter that I'm not very good at drawing.

It is reasonable to explain it rather than leaving the individual interpretation to the viewer.

My overwhelming feeling has been of fragmentation. There is that urge to do something to make things better, but do what and how and in what order? It's a lot of mental noise.

In case it is not clear, the more solid representation in the center is me with my head in my hands and on my knees. Then more abstract images coming out of me are me running, baking, talking on a cell phone, and prone (maybe due to despair, maybe for sleep).

If there are questions about the accuracy... I have reached out to people, though that was mainly through text. I do sleep on my face, though it is more of an issue lately that when trying to read I sometimes can't stay awake. I have not done any baking yet, but I am pretty sure I will. I haven't done a big baking since Sandy Hook, but I feel it coming on. 

I have not done any running, but it represents the urgency.

My brain is slowly falling back into a better order, though there are still a lot of unknowns. The clarity comes more from writing, but it doesn't mean that the drawing isn't valuable. Art can provide a better path for the things we haven't quite worked out intellectually. That is why it is good for emotions.

This may not be the end of it. I have had this idea for a poem in the back of my mind for a while, but I haven't actually tried writing it out; there is a certain snarkiness to the concept that I am not sure I could execute correctly. Still, if it keeps popping up, it may just be best to get it out.

The more important thing is that the art was just one step.

Emotions are real. They are often not good resting places, but they come up and that's not really something that you control, so feel them.

My recommending that people do some art was a way of validating those emotions, but then we move on.

One thing I had been wondering about before the election was whether I should be blogging more. This week, I will.

What do we do after we face the emotions?

Elections: Pride 2024

There has been a lot of memoir in this round of reading, mainly -- but not exclusively -- from transgender authors.

There are two incidents that are sticking with me. 

This departs from the order of writing I had planned on going in, and it probably puts me a week behind in my blogging. 

Some things should be different.

Obviously, both of these are from the 2016 election.

In the Form of a Question: The Joys and Rewards of a Curious Life by Amy Schneider

Schneider had recently relocated to Oakland, but found community there and attended a theater with a live feed on election night. Everyone was excited to see the announcement of our first woman president.

You know how that turned out.

Some people tried staying there, hoping, but she felt that she needed to leave. She stopped in a convenience store she frequently visited. The owners were immigrants and dark-skinned. They were talking, and something was  -- bothering is not exactly the right word, but something she couldn't understand. What she realized is that they weren't surprised. All of the white, lifelong citizens -- even though marginalized in some ways by their sexuality and identity -- had still been sheltered from knowing that so many people would really choose Trump.

The Risk it Takes to Bloom: On Life and Liberation by Raquel Willis

The intro to Willis' book is about her being invited to speak at the Women's March. 

Years ago I expressed concern about it and chose not to go, mostly due to it adhering so much to white feminism. 

Willis expressed some of the same concerns, but then they asked her to speak, and I was wondering if I misjudged them. Then, during her speech, she was cut off.

It happened just as she referred to the erasure of trans women of color, but that wasn't why. 

It wasn't exactly a coincidence. Apparently, it was a matter of someone being in a hurry to get the Indigo Girls on, and maybe just being too easy to not prioritize given a Black trans woman her time.

It is hard to feel like we have learned what we needed to learn.

 

Related posts:

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2017/01/i-did-not-march-rally-or-burn-anything.html

 

Democracy and the 2024 election

I have been posting daily about election-related things. That has included bad things about Trump and Vance, good things about Harris, Walz, and Biden, and things about business and media literacy.

I was starting to do one last post for today, and it started to have too much substance. I thought, okay, it's a blog post, and then it started to get kind of long for that too.

I generally do have a lot to say, but I am going to try and stay focused on this one aspect.

I was thinking about it because of the ballot box fires, but that came about because of the Proud Boys claiming they will be at polling places and various lawsuits about not counting ballots or removing voters from rolls. I was thinking about how great vote-by-mail is, but then in states with that, you still have people trying to take away the vote from people they don't like.

Of course, they have to be assuming they won't like those votes for the ballot box fires, but they are happening not just in states that tend to vote blue, but near the larger cities, also more likely to be blue. I mean, maybe it would make more sense to try it in Seattle than in Vancouver, but I if it's the same car in Portland and Vancouver, maybe they are too lazy to drive all the way up to Seattle.

It's probably someone different in Phoenix.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_ballot_drop_box_arson_attacks_in_the_United_States 

Anyway, what I was thinking about was all of the times I have seen people chime in -- when democracy is mentioned -- that we are not a democracy, we are a republic.

That is not a lie; on a federal level our laws and a lot of our budgeting are done by elected representatives. 

That is even frequently true for states, though 26 states have ballot initiatives or referendums available.

Those initiatives and that selection of who represents... I believe that is important, even though imperfect.

I can't help but notice that the people who have been so quick to negate democracy have tended to be conservatives. They tend to be the same ones who get irritated that the votes of some counties have more weight, without really dwelling on how that's because there are more people in those counties. 

(You know, if we decided the land should vote instead of the people, it would just end up being the land owners voting. Don't they already do enough damage by lobbying and buying up news sources?)

It also seems worth noting that some of those less democratic/more representative institutions -- like the apportionment of electoral votes and legislator allotment -- tend to favor the former slave-holding states. 

I will also note that when people put forward conservative ideas, it is unusual for it to be original; they tend to come through the same few sources and then get amplified.

Then I see men tweeting about how women shouldn't be allowed to vote (something coming up a lot this election cycle, even though one would think it had been settled over a century ago).

It makes sense that a party that knows that it can't win if everyone votes would teach contempt for democracy. 

It doesn't make it a good idea, and it doesn't make it right, but it makes sense.

I just wish people didn't fall for it so easily.

I know we are capable of better.

That's my wish going forward, and my goal is to help with that.