• Personal Growth

    I Just Don’t Get It

    November 25, 2014

    What is with the unblemished need to make one’s self right, by making someone else wrong?  I have seen these phenomena, countless times.  No doubt, at some point in my life, I was guilty of it.  But like acne and baby fat, I always thought it was something that you grow out of.  Not so much.  It occurs daily in so many subtle and not so subtle ways.

    Why do people think that they will appear superior only if and when another is shown to be inferior?  Over and over again I see nice people attacking another, in meetings, in boardrooms, in family conversations and anywhere else that two or more are gathered.  The underlying conversation seems to be, “if I outwit you, I am then, indeed, superior.  From this feeling of greatness, I get a prize.”

    As I observe these conversations, I am always struck with the question “What is the prize?”  How does it help you to have put someone down?  How does it help you to have pointed out the flaw in the personhood of another?  How can you feel stronger by that?  What do you gain?

    These random moments of meanness, which are so often accompanied by a smile and a nod are quite disconcerting.  It is no wonder that people, in general, have difficulty trusting each other.  We attack each other for no apparent reason; we launch this attack in public and then herald our superiority over others.  I won’t forget standing in a busy airport rushing to a connecting flight and stopping for food, my long time business partner and friend, announced loudly that I was foolish not to carry cash and then angrily threw her cash on the table, as if my personal habit was a philosophical shortcoming that made her re-evaluate our friendship.  No such thing happened, what eventually happened is that I re-evaluated our long-time friendship and she is no longer my friend.  I did not rid myself of this friendship because of that incident.  What happened is that I gradually recognized that my friend often expressed her superiority by touting my perceived inferiority.  What a disappointment and a heartbreaker.

    Read More
  • Baby Boomers,  Love and Relationships

    A Perspective That Bothered Me…

    November 12, 2014

    I read an article the other day, in a magazine that I normally admire, titled “Love Lessons from Second  Wives”.  Yes, I’m a second wife and always have been.  Point one against the author of this story who was never a second wife and cheerfully admits “frankly have been too lazy to get beyond threats” when discussing the possibility of divorce…

    She writes that her remarried friends help her to remember that there is value in keeping a marriage fresh and keeping ourselves fresh by dressing to “look good.”  She states that “Venerable relationships often falter on the question of compromise.  Second marriages, not so much.”  She states this as a fact (and here is where I am disappointed) as if lack of compromise is the reason for divorces.  She even cites a friend who admits that her marriage “imploded over birdbrained tiffs.”

    I do not recognize any of this and I am one of those who survived a divorce.  I do not like the article, because fundamentally, one should not make claims (even if secondary) about such a world breaking experience like divorce, unless you have lived it.  It is like a man describing childbirth – it’s not done.  When this author takes the position that compromise is critical to successful marriage, I can’t argue, after all, she is still married, but when she makes the supposition that lack of compromise is a cause for divorce, she steps out of bounds.  Who can discuss the soul-shattering experience of a spouse who dismisses you?  Who can tell of the spirit-crushing experience of a spouse’s sexual betrayal?  Who can enumerate the daily pains of living with addiction and alcoholism?  Those who have climbed those mountains and crawled through those valleys of tears, they can speak of these things, no other.

    No one ever starts out a marriage wanting a divorce, no one.  And learning to compromise comes with age, which is why second marriages often successfully compromise – the couple has learned through experience that life is better with agreement.  Anyone over the age of 40 will tell you that compromise wins in the long run.  You don’t have to be divorced to understand this.

    I’m not sure why I was annoyed with this author’s treatment of divorce and second marriages.  I just know that life is a lesson that cannot be explained by an onlooker.  You have to experience the depth to understand the breadth.

    Read More
  • Baby Boomers

    AARP

    November 6, 2014

    It occurs to me that today’s grandparents are nothing like they were 50 years ago.  I realized this when I was looking at an email my 60+ staff member was sending to the Director of our bureau.  She was chewing him out, letting him know that the action taken by the department was annoying to her and other staff members.  It did not cross her mind that she should offer silence about the inconvenience.  She simply believed that she should tell all and that she should tell all to the person who could do something about it.

    I’ve also noticed that quite a few of my men 60+ friends are riding Harley Davidson motorcycles with the full leather regalia.  They don’t want to wear helmets, they are rebellious in their hearts and they have a need to communicate that rebelliousness to the world.

    These grandparents are very happy to be.  They love their children and their grandchildren.  They are irreverent.  They flirt with their physicians, they talk with anyone.  There is very little that is intimidating to them.  I think that this is a good thing.  I think the world needs those who would question authority, status quo and all things institutional.  They are, as was the promise of the sixties, the new definition of our culture, lasting into the future…

    Read More
  • Baby Boomers,  Economic Equality (A Goal),  World Affairs

    Elitism: the Antithesis of Egalitarianism

    November 3, 2014

    If, indeed, our purpose is to find ways to live together productively and peacefully then I am sure that my job is to write.  I am positive that I have the right way to attain a productive and peaceful coexistence with anyone and everyone.  I am also sure that I can articulate it.

    We must realize that hierarchical social systems are the antithesis of egalitarian living.  Some argue that hierarchical social systems are necessary because of the number of humans on the planet.  I do not agree with this argument.  I also do not believe that leaders should be static.  Situational leadership demands that either the leader changes to fit the situation or the leadership must change to fit the situation.

    Our various hierarchical societies are a punishing way to construct humanity’s social system.  The current construct demands that those on the top of hierarchies be greedy, anti-social or both.  This is not to say that each and all wealthy and/or powerful humans are greedy, it is to say that the structure of hierarchy breeds greed.  Often, in order to get to the top of the hierarchy, one must engage in behavior that is antithetical to humanity.  Pushing to the “top” is sometimes a terrible game of cruelty that leaves many victimized and demoralized.

    The American culture which began so full of hope for equality for all humans, came to idolize wealth instead of humanitarian ideals and thus lost the initial impetus for effective social change for equality and an egalitarian way of life for humans of the Earth.

    This is unfortunate, as it is a delay that has cost us many years and many lives.  The American culture encourages elitism and champions those who fight to the “top” of our various social systems and cultures.  We have therefore bred a group of leaders who proudly look only to their own good, who overtly attempt control of different social systems and who hoard money in any way possible in order to further their own ends.  This group of leaders feels that it is their right, by virtue of the fact that they sit on top of the elite social structure, to have more and better just for them and no one else.  As the governor’s campaign says “Power for the few, but not for you.”

    How do we change this?  How do we make it better, different, important, once again, as a human ideal?  First we must acknowledge that equality is a value that we wish to place above other qualities.  We must also acknowledge that on the slippery slope of making money, we forgot that human beings and their lives are more important than any amount of money.  As others have said “You cannot have a war, if no one comes.”  If we want our sons and daughters to live into old age, we will not send them into battlefields where American millionaires find more and more ways to keep money that they have not earned.  If we were sincere about this, we would reverse the legislation of the Reagans and Bushes and make it illegal (immoral, of course) to make money from a war – no matter the cause of the war.

    To restate:

    1.  Our purpose with each other is to find ways to peacefully and productively coexist.

    2.  Our culture does not encourage coexistence.

    3.  Hierarchical cultures encourage elitism and discourage egalitarianism.

    4.  Our hierarchical cultures are punishing for humans.

    5.  Leadership in America idolizes wealth over all things, including human beings.

    6.  America must come back to valuing human life above all things.

    7. If it was illegal to profit from war, there would be no war.

    Read More
  • Economy of Effort,  Womens Issues

    “Connect With Them”

    October 25, 2014

    She said to me that she had to connect with someone and that as soon as she did that, then “I’m good, it’s all good.”  She said that if she could not connect then she always had her hand up with that person, and she showed me, pushing her open palm outward across the table.  She said if I cannot feel the connection, then it just doesn’t matter.  I can get along with anyone, but I have to feel them to have a relationship with them…

    For her, it was as simple as that.  She knew exactly who she could have a relationship with, she did not need doubt or misdirection.  She only needed connection.

    Read More
  • Economic Equality (A Goal)

    Inequality

    October 15, 2014

    Blogaction

    When I was young, men were not always interested in their offspring. Fathers leaving children was a common occurrence, particularly in poverty stricken neighborhoods. The abandonment rate for men leaving their children has, historically, always been much higher than it is for women.  Women just do not abandon their children as often as men do.

    The Encyclopedia of Child’s Health cites the following statistics: In 2002 it was estimated that up to 30 percent (19.8 million) of children in the United States, representing 11.9 million families, lived in single-parent households. While the number of single mothers has remained constant in recent years at 9.9 million, the number of single fathers has grown from 1.7 million in 1995 to 2 million in 2002, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2002, some 19.8 million children lived with one parent. Of these, 16.5 million lived with their mother and 3.3 million with their father. Read more: http://www.healthofchildren.com/A/Abandonment.html#ixzz3ATQLP77B

    No doubt, the numbers of child abandonment are growing, but the percentage of fathers abandoning children appear to be decreasing. On other occasions I have written about my own sons’ commitment to fathering and I am very impressed. This new generation of young men is a very caring one. I like that they like the job of fatherhood.

    The other phenomena that is worthy of note is that it is now quite fashionable to be a parent. Only the ‘middle class and more’ can afford to have children, so children have become a symbol of affluence.

    Unfortunately, my ‘loved-one’ fights for custody of her young son. The man that she fights with is someone who has kicked and punched her. There is documented evidence that he not only kicked her, but there is also evidence that he has done this to other women.

    Their last appearance in court is the textbook case for inequality. I say this because, obviously, men control the legal system, as they do many other American institutions. This control allows men to steer the outcome of social contracts in ways that are beneficial to men. As long as children were seen as burdens within the purview of women; children did not gain much institutional attention from men.  For many years, the outcomes of divorces have been deplorable for women; some of that unfairness has begun to change. However, awarding child custody has become the new injustice perpetrated by a court system dominated by men.

    My ‘loved-one’s’ court case for the custody of her child has been “continued” on 4 different occasions. What started out last year and even had a court date in January is not resolved in August and the next court date is October. In the meantime, the mother supports a household on her income with no child support, while the father lives with his father, who also pays for attorney fees. As is the case in most states, a guardian ad litem (GAL) was assigned to the child to investigate the parents’ charges against each other.   The facts of the case include: the father violated two court orders, the visitation order and the “no hostile contact” order. There were no consequences for the father’s behavior. The GAL ignored the evidence of the father’s first born son’s mother, who was willing to speak about the father’s negative behavior. The GAL spent all of her court time favoring and chatting with the father and father’s attorney. The GAL was clearly annoyed with my loved one and her attorney during the proceedings.  The GAL turned down all evidence offered by the mother (my loved one). The court continues to rule in the favor of the father, granting visitation based on the father’s schedule instead of the mother’s schedule.

    The court sees no urgency in resolving the issue. After over a year of expensive attorney and court fees, the grandfather is now suing for custody of the child. My loved-one is alone in a state without her family. She works to support herself. She is required to pay for an attorney and maintain a household for her children. The father has no such requirements; his father pays the legal bills. Additionally the father does not maintain a household and because of his status as a merchant marine has no intention of maintaining a household.

    The court has not recognized the father’s violations of court orders, nor has the court recognized the unfairness of the situation. No binding requirements have been placed on the father, either by the fact that he is a father, nor by the court system.  The court shows extreme bias towards the father in all awards and considerations. All of the requirements of motherhood are placed on my ‘loved-one’ and more, she must support them financially and pay for her attorney.

    No doubt I am biased for my ‘loved-one’, but before that becomes an issue, understand that I am one of those women, that is 100% intolerant of violence and man-on-woman or man-on-child violence is the worst kind. So my bias dates way back to before these two people had this child. My bias dates back to the first time he ever laid hands on her to hurt her. My thought is that if you must do violence to another, then you do not deserve any sort of relationship, you have done irrevocable damage. To the father I say, “you hide behind money and a court system that is blind to your despicable nature. That is all too bad. And make no mistake, the child suffers.  I think it is too bad that the father does not suffer the way that his child suffers.”

    Back to the concept of Inequality, it is always the result of a superior stance made and maintained by any one group of humans. What will it take for humans to create equality on earth? What will it take to get humans to think outside of their own experience and to be open about the vast differences between human experiences? The superior always assume that their own experience is THE experience and nothing could be further from the truth.

    What is the white man presiding over my ‘loved-one’s’ family court case thinking? Has he experienced a beating at the hands of someone stronger? Has he fed his family on wages? Has he struggled to find a responsible babysitter so that he could work and make those wages? Does he sit on the court bench and imagine that the ‘craziness’ is the doing of the victim? Does he know that feeling helpless and abused can cause craziness? Does he understand that my ‘loved-one’ earned everything she has with hard work and effort and that effort is a lonely effort? My loved-one is not alone, but in this chore, fighting for her child, she must struggle alone, though many support her, it is her fight.

    Equality, when and where?

    Read More
  • Management,  Psychology of Life

    Mistaken Because of Failed Distinctions

    September 26, 2014

    We all associate qualities together, often lumping like qualities into one clump that describes and explains the actions of the other person.  Our brain makes all kinds of associations about everything, those associations were important to survival.  We needed to be able to recognize a past sign of danger when the danger re-presented itself.  The human race often equates predators with “evil” attributes.  Thus, lumping like qualities together: predator = evil.

    I have complained about this tendency in previous articles, as my family has blonde hair and there are plenty of attributes that are assigned to the quality of blonde: blonde hair + woman = dumb.  Additionally, the feminine characteristics have often been the subject of writing and research on false characteristic attribution.

    My latest complaint is that the qualities of gentleness and kindness are often equated with weakness and passivity.  I have prided myself more and more with the qualities of gentleness and kindness.  As I grow older, I feel more capable of exercising these attributes often.  However, I do not, under any circumstance and for any reason want anyone to see me as weak or passive.  Weak and passive people are often challenged by others and purposely controlled by those who seek power and control.  There are times when each of us must be weak and passive, however as enduring characteristics they are not the traits I wish to be remembered for.

    Kindness is the quality of being friendly, generous and considerate.  Kindness is something that I actively give, on the other hand, passivity is not a giving, true passivity is no thing at all; it means no active response.  Someone who has the quality of gentle is mild and kind and again, it is a giving, a moderate giving, but still a giving.  Weakness is again, somewhat like passivity as there is no action, it is inaction: lacking the power to perform demanding tasks.

    I think it is human to make associations, but I think it is a mistake to ignore the distinctions between qualities.  If you believe that my kindness equals passivity and will allow you the luxury of pushing me towards your goals with the ignoring of my goals, you are quite mistaken.  You may think that my kindness makes me weak and that gives you the ability to tell me how to be or what to do; that is a mistake.  I have no need to scream or curse, or yell, I simply go my own way.  It is good to take heed of this information about distinctions.

    Often, in the workplace, bosses short cut to getting things done without truly listening to the staff.  The staff are trying to be good “soldiers” and follow the direction of the manager.  However, when staff make an attempt to give good feedback to a manager, they are often cut off.  Bosses mistake compliance with weakness and should not.  Many staff will simply go underground with their feelings and thoughts.  This underground can develop into a powerful energy force that collaborates against the manager.

    This system can and does happen in the home or in other family collaborations.  That person with power and control forgets that real ‘control’ is a result of a positively negotiated system of relationships and power structures that take into account complex strengths and weaknesses.

    I started writing this article because I think we are mistaken when we ‘clump’ attributes together or associate them into a single characteristic.  Then I shifted to discussing power in relationships.  I believe that the assessment of characteristics in others sometimes leads us to behavior that is not quite right.  It is much more healthy and more realistic to remain open and to enjoy what people bring to the relationship in the moment that the relationship is occurring.  Associations with the past and with like qualities “clumped” together make it difficult for us to focus our attention and our awareness to the moment.  If we are in a position of power, we may lose out on all of the individuality that the other person brings to the relationship.  We may be so obsessed with our own point of view and the other person’s acquiescence that we miss the other person completely.

    Read More
  • Psychology of Life,  Speaking as a Parent

    How the Blog Started

    September 2, 2014

    The Push-Me Pull-You Llama is a character in a children’s book. The push-me pull-you is a 2 headed llama, who often fought against himself when trying to go in any direction, both heads tried to lead. I read this Doctor Dolittle book to my kids when they were young. Later as my kids grew older, I often felt like my kids and I were an expression of the two-headed llama. When my kids became teenagers they would try to pull away from me. I would try to hold onto them, as I was not ready to give them up. When my sons went into the service, I would write letters, sometimes daily, to keep them close. There were times, when I felt ‘complete’ as if I could be satisfied with my child-rearing and it appeared that life was moving on. Often, when I detached from an adult child – that is when the adult child would start expressing need for me. It was as if we were always in a mismatched dance of dependence and independence. We could never be in concert: I pulled away, they pushed, I pushed them close, they pulled away.

    As the kids moved out, they often lived a few miles away and being separate from them was sometimes shocking and sometimes painful. I always wondered if I had taught them enough and explained enough to them. I wanted to be sure that each and every one of them had the right tools to be successful in life. Ultimately, life is a trickster and no matter what skills you have picked up along the way, life will throw you the curve ball. There is no way to prepare for all of life’s challenges.

    That’s why I started the blog. I have always written and always loved writing. The bottom line was to stay in touch with many and far-flung kids no matter where they wandered in the world. This way, I could feel more complete about our conversations – I could feel as if I had given them everything they needed.

    The blog became more, I started living my life myself and realizing how rich the world is. I began getting involved: http://blogactionday.org/register-to-take-part/ Writing has its own reward, I didn’t need to do it to ‘finish’ raising the kids; I needed to do it for me. This is where I am today. Yes, I dearly love to continue communicating with my kids. Now, the blog has taken a life of its own. It is an expression of us, my family, in this ever changing world.

    Read More