The id Blogger: GUNS AND VIOLENCE IN AMERICA: ...

The id Blogger: GUNS AND VIOLENCE IN AMERICA: ...:             I had barely had a chance to absorb the murder-suicide committed by Kansas City football player, Jovan Belcher, when there w...

GUNS AND VIOLENCE IN AMERICA: The Many Ingredients of Violent Discontent

            I had barely had a chance to absorb the murder-suicide committed by Kansas City football player, Jovan Belcher, when there was a mass shooting at a shopping mall, followed 3 days later bythe horrific massacre at Newtown, Conn, in which 28 people died, including twenty 6 and 7 year-old children, and six educators; as well as the shooter and his murdered mother.  While there is much conversation in the twitter-verse and blogasphere, as well as in Washington lately, something about this last incident seems to have tipped the conversation somewhat, to a greater acceptance of implementing reasonable gun safety measures.        

While I am glad to see the conversation shifting somewhat, it appears that many are looking for some kind of magical one-stop answer to an issue that is very complicated and involves many different aspects of our society. There are also those on the right who respond immediately and defensively, as though armed forces are going to trample through their homes and businesses next week and confiscate all of their firearms.

There are no easy answers, no quick solutions that would have prevented these incidents from occurring; nor any easy solutions to future prevention of such horrific acts. Any sustaining solution to gun safety issues must include not only easy access to weapons, but mental health accessibility and privacy, as well as the glorification of violence in our culture, from video games to TV shows.

I grew up in a small town, probably much like Newtown in many ways. Known as the “Cowboy Cradle of the Southwest,” my home town reveled in the cowboy culture of horses, rodeos and guns. At that time, we also had a federal and state prison, which employed many of our local citizens. A lot of people had guns, but never flaunted or worshipped them. They were used for hunting and personal protection. Dove and quail were hunted in our neck of the woods, and deer farther north. On occasion, local hunters would bring my mother dressed carcasses of dove and quail, as well as venison steaks, because they knew of our struggle with poverty, and that my mother needed this meat to feed us.

I will always respect hunters and those who use guns for sport, as I know so many of them, and know them to be responsible gun owners. Moreover, this is really a more holistic way to feed oneself, rather than picking a package out of a cellophaned butcher counter. Perhaps some of my liberal friends who shudder at the mere mention of a gun, could treat these individuals with greater respect for their way of life, and realize that any outright ban of all personal firearms is not only, just not going to happen, but is unnecessary and disrespectful to their fellow Americans. However, if any of the weapons used by Adam Lanza had been used for hunting, there would be nothing left of those birds to cook.

             So what is reasonable with regard to guns? A ban on assault weapons? Restricted access for those who are not mentally and emotionally mature enough and stable enough to control their emotional impulses? Certainly these solutions seem reasonable to most of us, but creating legislation that addresses the competing interests of freedom, safety and privacy needs to be arrived at very carefully and methodically in order to arrive at a meaningful solution that also respects the freedom and privacy of our citizens. I am confident that compromise can be found as our lawmakers prepare to debate and negotiate more appropriate gun safety laws, in an effort to prevent such wholesale slaughter in the future.

            The issues of violence in our culture and mental health distinctions are much more complex, however.  We will all need to set aside our egos and what we think we know as we navigate all of the complications that implicate 1^st amendment freedoms and privacy issues. For me, the issues of violent cultural choices and mental health are not always easy to separate. For example, in the case of the Belcher murder-suicide, I see a number of prevention tools that were either not known to the victims, or simply ignored.

Let me explain further. This murder-suicide took place on a Saturday.  Saturdays for professional football players are “game-face” days. In other words, in order to prepare for the next day’s aggression, a football player starts to put his “game-face” on in the 24 – 48 hours preceding the big game. Which means that Belcher was most likely already in an aggressive mind-set, as well we would expect. His victim, Kasandra Perkins, being very young, very stressed out and extremely hormonal, being 3 months post-partum, was possibly not in complete emotional control either. So, we have game-face and raging hormones most likely controlling the conversation and communications between these 2 people. When we add to this scenario, access to a firearm in the overwhelming gun culture prevalent in professional sports, we have a recipe for violent disaster. I wonder if either of them had every been counseled about how to avoid and/or resolve quarrels by using tools and methods that can be taught to all of us.

While there is a lot of discussion out there about violence in public places, there is woefully little about violence in the home and its effects on our culture as a whole. Isn’t home where everything begins? It is my opinion, based on my experience, not only as a family law attorney, but as a mother, daughter, sister and human being, that many of us were abused, in one way or another as children. I am not blaming my mother, or the Greatest Generation, or any one entity, but I have to be honest about the violence I grew up with in my home; and the years of treatment and medication it has taken for me to cope and learn to leave that part of my life behind. Social mores were different then, and what was once discipline is now considered abuse. My mother did the best she could, and there was no real help for her in dealing with her rage and inability to control her emotions at times, so she never sought treatment for her depression. If she had, she probably would have had her children removed from the home, which would have exacerbated her emotional imbalance. Most child abusers were themselves abused. Most of them need treatment, not incarceration where there illness can only fester, left untreated.

Too many of us have witnessed and/or personally experienced ways in which violence is used as a problem-solving tool. For some of us, that lesson was learned at an early age. This is the root of the problem, I assert, for many people with uncontrollable violent tendencies. When we see this as children, and are not treated for our trauma, or not taught other ways resolve differences that are as quick and effective as violence, we begin to adopt it as our own, whether consciously or subconsciously. Moreover, when we see this tool being used in all kinds of ways for entertainment value, it becomes an acceptable norm.

            And when we see, over and over again, this tool being used by others, and merely lamented instead of adequately analyzed in an attempt to prevent it, we become hopeless and/or defensive. I think this is where we find ourselves today.

            First and foremost, we must ensure that all of us, especially our children have ready access to mental health care professionals. Children in pain are often willing to talk to an adult about their issues if they feel that they are safe and that their sharing will not lead to further complications for their parents and families. I know that I never shared my trauma because I thought that my mother would be punished and that the authorities would take me away from her. Even as a child, I knew that she needed help more than punishment. I am not suggesting that child abusers not be held accountable, especially those who inflict permanent physical damage. But amends can be made in other ways that don’t further threaten whatever stability those children have in their lives, or that induce a sense of guilt for having their parents imprisoned. Some child-abusers need to be behind bars; most do not. Here in California, the Children's Court in place to deal with dysfunctional and dangerous conditions for children, is woefully underfunded and sometimes seen as only adding additional trauma to young lives due to inadequate resources. The mental health of children should be our highest, not our lowest priority.

            My ultimate point is this:  children who were themselves abused, or witnessed physical abuse and violence in their families of origin, and who are treated for their trauma, are less likely to become violent themselves. Moreover, they are more likely to know how to get help for themselves and their families, when they see emotions escalating into violence. There are solutions if we have the will to prioritize our nation's mental health, especially for children.

            How’s that for a starting point in dealing with violence in our communities?

The id Blogger: THE BITTERSWEET HARVEST OF GRIEF

The id Blogger: THE BITTERSWEET HARVEST OF GRIEF:               I am not myself lately. October 30, 2012, will mark the 6 month anniversary of my mother’s death. It will also be just ov...

The id Blogger: A PERSONAL STORY OF CHOICE

The id Blogger: A PERSONAL STORY OF CHOICE:               Thirty-three ago, almost to the day, I made one of the most profound and challenging decisions of my entire life. I was...

The id Blogger: THE GOP AND RACE IN AMERICA: Whiteness to Die For...

The id Blogger: THE GOP AND RACE IN AMERICA: Whiteness to Die For...: By  M. Irene Daniel                 I have been working on this story for a while now. Every time I felt ready to write it, more inci...

The id Blogger: What does "better qualified" mean?

The id Blogger: What does "better qualified" mean?: On November 1, 2012, I responded to an op-ed penned by Michael Kinsley regarding affirmative action. Kinsley was responding to a recent stu...

The id Blogger: Post-election Musings

The id Blogger: Post-election Musings:             It has been 4 weeks since election day and I finally feel ready to talk about it, having given some time for things to sink in;...

Post-election Musings

            It has been 4 weeks since election day and I finally feel ready to talk about it, having given some time for things to sink in; as well as to observe reactions, overreactions and other fall-out from this historic election.

            I am, of course, very glad that my candidate won and that it was a very good day for Democrats. Having been on the losing end in 2000, a bitter defeat, I wish no ill-will for those whose candidate did not win.

            More than anything else, I am relieved; not just that the election is over, but that the White House could not be purchased or stolen by empowered and politically active wealth. Even beyond that, my greatest relief is that our nation’s citizens chose moving forward instead of falling backward. By this I mean that the giant step forward with the election of America’s first African-American President, was not followed by a couple of steps backward by giving any legitimacy to the birthers and those who sought to undermine the authority of the Obama presidency before it even began nearly 4 years ago.

            I remember feeling a new sense of excitement and inclusion in 2008, and that feeling was reaffirmed last month. The reason this is so important is because of our post-Civil War history of electing former slaves to Congress and state legislatures, only to destroy the hopes of African-Americans at that time, with the rise of Jim Crow and the Ku Klux Klan. I was very afraid of a backlash, fueled by the incensed racists in the Republican party, who will never be able to honor President Obama with any dignity or respect.  This does not mean that all Republicans are racists. I don't believe that to be true. I am referring only to that part of the Republican party that is obviously racist.

            The racists of today will tell you that the reason those post-Reconstruction blacks elected to office were unable to manage the difficulty and sophistication of governing, was because of “what happened to them.” I heard someone explain this situation to me using those very words in my law office in South Pasadena a couple of years ago.  I almost could not believe what I was hearing. This is but one example of the myriad expressions of white supremacy, subliminal or otherwise, heard in and around Pasadena, California in the 21^st century.

            This is the very same tone used by John Sununu, among others, who constantly implied that President Obama tried, but just wasn’t up to the job. Sununu, Rush Limbaugh, et al, all were trying to appeal the subliminal white supremacist in most of white America today, by suggesting that he was lazy, that he didn’t understand what it meant to be “American,” and that he was everything but what he actually is – an intelligent, strong and effective global leader. There are hundreds of examples of this disdain for blackness in the White House, but they really are not worth repeating, and it would take too much time and space to do so.

            However, it appears that the backlash would be to the Republicans for spewing such 19^th century ideas of ethnic inferiority in this day and age. For, in so doing, they actually may have done more than any other factor to motivate non-whites to vote in 2012. Latinos were very motivated after the State of Arizona passed SB1070, clearly meant to target all Mexican-looking people, in their hunt for “illegals;” and heralded by the extreme right wing of the GOP. Blacks became more motivated when faced with the attempts by the Republican party to disenfranchise them, particularly in important swing states; and the LGBT community was encouraged by President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage. The women of America were mostly not willing to turn their bodies over to people like Todd Akin and Richard Murdoch, who obviously had no idea what they were talking about, and then were stunned to find their comments so unwelcome.

            So, it appears that a strong coalition of “the other” turned out to say to the world that they were simply not going to take this kind of stuff lying down anymore. When buoyed by the surprisingly large youth vote, this army of non-white, non-male, non-wealthy, non-straight and non-old people overwhelmed all Republican attempts, legitimate and otherwise, to convince most Americans that their interests would best be served by a Romney presidency. The youth vote is significant because the under-30 vote doesn’t usually vote in large numbers in two presidential election cycles in a row.

            Thus, it appears that the changing demographic in America resoundingly rejected the otherization of their neighbors, friends, lovers and class-mates, choosing instead to move forward as one nation -- a nation that honors, not lambasts its citizens. Obama supporters want to see a nation that cares for its sick, educates its children and honors the daily labor of the people who actually do the heavy lifting of keeping our economy moving.

            It appears, however, that the GOP didn’t get the memo on who won the election. Even a month after the election, they are completely dumbfounded by their huge demographic and electoral loss. I must say, I am dumbfounded by their dumbfoundedness.  My experience with conservative Caucasians in America is that, they just don’t know what they don’t know. The sad truth is, they don’t want to know.

What does "better qualified" mean?

On November 1, 2012, I responded to an op-ed penned by Michael Kinsley regarding affirmative action. Kinsley was responding to a recent study suggesting that those admitted to prestigious law schools under affirmative action programs, and hence less qualified, would be better off going to universities with a less challenging curriculum.

Kinsley's piece challenged this assumption, and I agreed with most of what he wrote in this column. When he used the term "better qualified," however, to describe those non-affirmative action admissions, I could not keep silent.

My response to Kinsley's discounting of my qualifications, is reposted below. What do you think?


Re "Overthinking affirmative action," Opinion, Nov. 1

I was admitted to UCLA Law School in 1987, when it had an aggressive and effective affirmative action program. I take issue with most of white America's view that affirmative action lowers the bar for minorities in the admissions process, selecting us over "better qualified" applicants.

What qualifications are we talking about? I was a single mother in college and worked 40 hours a week. Thus, I had at least 55 hours a week that were unavailable for study, even though I also carried a full load and consistently had a high grade-point average.

So the real question is, if those applicants who were trust-funded through school had to do what I did to get to the same place, could they have done so?

Affirmative action is about assessing one's qualifications in ways that measure things other than GPAs and test scores.

Irene Daniel

Los Angeles

THE GOP AND RACE IN AMERICA: Whiteness to Die For

By  M. Irene Daniel

                I have been working on this story for a while now. Every time I felt ready to write it, more incidences of GOP dog whistles surfaced. However, I don’t really want to talk about the comments or antics of the likes of Ann Coulter or Donald, the clown, Trump. That would be too easy. Pointing out the obviously ugly and arrogant ignorance of these, and their ilk, is really not challenging, or new. Going over their comments and pointing out the obvious is not only an odious task, but is simply a waste of precious time.

                I would like to examine what is behind these dog whistles, and why they are so effective. I want to talk about the power of an idea, an idea of whiteness, and what the history of this idea has been. How has this idea evolved, or devolved, and how does it continue to manifest today in our country?

                I was recently chatting with a friend of mine who grew up in the south. She told me the story of how one of her white male relatives, a life-long Democrat who actually agreed with Obama’s policies and intentions, could simply not bring himself to vote for a black man. Just couldn’t do it. She also shared how ashamed he was and that he felt powerless to change.  Initially, I was angered by this story. This anger, however, fueled a curiosity, which led to seeking, which led me to compassion for this man who seemed trapped by an obsolete, yet still powerful idea, of white supremacy.  Rather than assign shame or blame for the racial divide in this country, I find it more productive, as well as more interesting, to attempt to trace its origin, in an attempt to understand the largeness of the idea of whiteness.

I recalled a memory of my own, in which the child of a white conservative friend of mine was telling a story about a group of people. There was “a black man, and a Mexican, and an American,” he said. Before he could continue, I asked him what he meant by “American.” He confirmed that the American in his story was the white person. I asked him if he thought that only white people could be Americans. He seemed to have that “deer in the headlights” look on his face, as we both realized that no one had ever had this kind of conversation with this young man.

                I was not angry with him at all. He was just a kid after all, about 10 years old. But I was somewhat surprised at how easily these categories came to him. He was not in any way a mean or insensitive child; in fact, quite the opposite. He was growing up in a white middle-class conservative Christian family that would in no way see themselves as racist, nor did I. And yet, somehow, his perception of a white America indicated a priority, or superiority.

                I recently read an op-ed in the LA Times (October 18, 2012) wherein K.C. Cole, a professor of journalism at USC, referred to such classification as “default assumptions.” It is these default assumptions that suggest images and priorities. For example, when we think of the term CEO, our hard drive conjures up an image of a white male. It is these default assumptions that suggest to white Americans that “affirmative action hires” are less worthy and/or competent than white males. I will more specifically address affirmative action in another blog post in the interest of brevity and readability. For both of these issues are more complex than black and white.

                I have personally witnessed countless examples of people being unable to change, or even challenge their default assumptions about others. I recall my third year in law school at UCLA, involving the Roscoe Pound Moot Court competition. In the spring of 1990, when the moot court finalists were announced, there was not one able-bodied white male among them. There were white males with physical disabilities, a few white women (one of whom was blind), and several persons of color, male and female, who successfully argued their way, orally and in writing, to this major law school victory. This perceived “dumbing down” of moot court motivated one of the white males in our school to write an opinion in ‘The Docket,’ our law school newspaper, discounting the esteemed honor earned by these accomplished finalists. He basically accused the judges of lowering the standards in order to allow these candidates to prevail, and lamented that this would lead to the devaluation of his law school diploma from a school that molly-coddles “the other.” He thought it was very humanitarian to try to give these people a chance, but it wasn’t worth the devaluation of his degree, and hence, his future.

                This inaccurate perception of non-white success is often found in the comments of John Sununu, one of Mitt Romney’s most prominent surrogates, suggesting that President Obama is not a legitimate occupier of the White House, not "American" enough. I have also witnessed this attitude in my own personal life. I remember hearing conservative white people expressing outrage at the fact that my brother owned a home with a pool, and that I had been admitted to the UCLA School of Law; the perception being that something was amiss here. How could these dirty Mexicans deserve things like pools and educations? These things were for white people. These are not imagined or exaggerated examples of how many, not all, white conservatives perceive ethnic minorities, especially minority women. These are, but a few, real memories from my life experience. What I know of racial misperceptions I know, not because I read it about somewhere, even though I have studied racial issues even beyond college and law school, but because I have lived the reality of the “default assumption” that white is better, smarter, more worthy.

                When I was in college I wrote a paper entitled, “How Racism Killed Huey Long,” the premise of which is, I think, informative here. Although there were no persons of color directly involved with the assassination of the Louisiana Kingfish, the idea of whiteness over blackness played a major role in the deaths of Long and his assassin, both white men of sophistication and stature in their community.

                Huey Long was assassinated by Carl Austin Weiss, the son-in-law of Judge Benjamin Pavy, a longtime political rival of the Kingfish.  At the time of his murder, Long had made so many powerful and corrupt enemies that he was always surrounded by several armed bodyguards. So, any attempt on his life would most assuredly end, not in arrest, but death by bodyguard. The assassin was a young, and very accomplished, medical doctor with a wife and baby, and seemingly everything to look forward to in life. So why would a young man with a beautiful young family and a promising professional future commit knowing suicide by taking a shot at Huey Long?

                A story had been leaked that Long was about to expose what he said was proof that Judge Pavy’s family lineage was tainted with negro blood. While this might seem laughable today, in the 1930’s Louisiana of Jim Crow, having even 1/32 negro blood meant that you could not drink from white drinking fountains, use white bathrooms, or enjoy any other privilege of whiteness. And for this young man, the thought of his little baby drinking out of the same drinking fountains as negroes, was enough to commit himself to his own death, if it meant preventing such a dark future for his little white baby. His whiteness was, literally, to die for.

                Even though there is no more Jim Crow, centuries of legally sanctioned racism, and the ensuing exploitation of ethnic minorities, cannot be overcome with less than half a century of trying to correct this festering American cancer of racism.  The residual subliminal racism affects us all. Even those who have been discriminated against sometimes adopt a preference for whiteness.  Otherwise, why is it that, in test after test, little black girls prefer white dolls, and often see whiteness as prettier? We have all been conditioned, on some level of consciousness to see whiteness as better, more desirable. Much of this societal norm is not intentional, but, as Robert Frost once said, “Way leads on to way.”

                These residual attitudes need not be viewed as anything but a natural consequence of our racial history. We are now, however, in the 21st century, and it is time to evolve out of this notion of whiteness as superior. For, just as was the case with Huey Long, this outdated and incorrect attitude, is what is killing the 90% white GOP. It might not happen in this election cycle, but certainly by the next presidential election, no group, of any kind, that is 90% white will be viable for long. This is not ideology. This is math.

                The 3 largest growing demographics in the United States right now are women, youth and Latinos. Accordingly, whatever you are selling in the USA, be it ideologies, cars or washing machines, this is your target market. Generally, when one is courting a target market, the intent is to invite, entice and encourage that market to take a look at your product, or, as is the case with the GOP, your policies. If I were trying to encourage someone to join a group, I would try to ensure that they felt comfortable, and not out of place in said group. Why then, is the Republican party doing exactly the opposite when it comes to ethnic minorities, or as I heard one Tea Party member describe us, “the mud races?” He actually said that, I’m not making any of this up.

                The obvious, and unconstitutional, attempts to disenfranchise blacks and Latinos in numerous swing states, the inhumane manner in which undocumented Latinos are maligned, the racial-profiling legislation like Arizona’s SB1070 – the show-me-your-papers law, the unprecedented rudeness and disrespect for our first African-American president, the birthers and those who want to see the president’s report card, and the list could go on forever; are all ideas promulgated by Republicans and all evidence an assumption regarding the superiority of whiteness in America. And it is this assumption that seems to drive much of the opposition to President Obama. This does not mean, of course, that any criticism of the president is racist. I have some criticisms of my own. Rather, it is the manner in which this critique is communicated by the extreme right that is racially derogatory, replete with references to watermelons and images of witch-doctors. Moreover, Mitt Romney’s condescending manner reinforces this idea that President Obama is not “American;” kinda like that 10-year old kid I told you about earlier.

                 The point of all of this for me, is to try to understand why the idea of whiteness, as well as the default assumption of its supremacy, is still so powerful today. Who can deny that this is true? And even more confounding, is why people like Carl Weiss, and institutions like the Republican party, prefer non-existence in whiteness, to surviving by acknowledging racial equality, and surrending the false notion that being white somehow makes one more credible.

A PERSONAL STORY OF CHOICE

 

            Thirty-three ago, almost to the day, I made one of the most profound and challenging decisions of my entire life. I was pregnant, unmarried, emotionally immature and unprepared, Catholic and confused.  I was enrolled in a local community college, but had not yet earned my college and law degrees. Even though I was on the pill and in a committed relationship with my baby’s father (who I’ll call Bob), our love was still fresh and new, and relatively untested. I wasn’t sure if I could rely upon Bob to be there for me or our child.

            I was very lucky in that Bob and I discussed this matter very openly and honestly. He wanted the baby, and said he would be there as a father, regardless of the long-term status of our union. What he said next I realize now is one of the greatest examples of respect that I’ve ever experienced. He told me that, even though he wanted this baby, he would defer to me to make the final decision because it was I who had to carry and deliver the child, as well as assume a lifetime of responsibilities, limitations and physical and emotional changes that he did not have to experience. I will always respect and love this man as a true friend for being so far ahead of his time, and for honoring me with such human decency and respect.

            After much talking, crying, praying and contemplation, I made my choice. I called Planned Parenthood and made an appointment to terminate my unplanned pregnancy. Even though I felt emotionally and morally conflicted at times, I was not certain that I could provide my child with all the things that I didn’t get, and that contributed to the family dysfunction that I had lived in all of my life. I did not want to share generations of dysfunction with this new being, and didn’t think I had anything else to offer to a child. I didn’t want my baby to have the kind of childhood that I had had, and since I did not know at the time how to see past it, I thought the most responsible thing to do was to save this child from the abandonment and abuse that I had suffered; a fate that seemed to me, almost inevitable. This is why I was on the pill at the time, a fact that I felt justified the therapeutic abortion.

            In talking to the people at Planned Parenthood, I never experienced any kind of pressure to choose one way or another. There was only a profound professionalism and compassionate tone that made me feel safe and unashamed. This was a very empowering experience for me.

            When the day came, however, I found that I this was really not the right choice for me, in this particular circumstance; and not out of guilt or shame, but rather because of what I had learned in the process of examining all my choices. I had to have enough emotional courage to admit that I was not alone. I knew I would need help, and this would invite emotional intimacy with others, especially my baby; and that maybe it was time to open my heart, which especially at that time, was very closed and cold.

Moreover, I realized that, since Bob had demonstrated his unwillingness to impose something so permanent upon me, perhaps I should consider his wishes more carefully, and give them more weight than my insecurities and dysfunctional history. By going through this very personal, emotional, and life-changing process, I learned a lot about myself, and especially about my partner. In so doing, I came to realize that my fears for this child needn’t become reality; and that we could create a new reality for our new family.

 I am glad I changed my mind. But you see, it was my choice, my decision to take all the emotional risks necessary to become a mother. And those in my life who loved me, supported me in my leap of faith.

When I picked up the phone to cancel my appointment, my voice was breaking and I almost burst into tears. I was barely able to say the words, “I don’t think I’m going to be able to keep my appointment today,” as I spoke through muffled sobs. I will never forget the response I received from the woman on the other end of the line. I could actually hear the compassionate and knowing smile in her voice. Yes, she understood and wished me and my baby well, from everyone at Planned Parenthood. She also reminded me that they would always be available for any present and future needs I may have, and invited me to call anytime I needed them.

Fortunately for me, I have never again needed or used the services of Planned Parenthood. I have no idea who the women were who talked to me on the phone, but I do know that they made a lasting impression on me, and the memory of their professionalism and compassion sustains me still.

I share this story because I think it is important for women who have had abortions, or even thought about having one, to honor ourselves and one another by releasing us all from any sense of shame for exercising our legal choices, regardless of what choice was made. I think it is also important for Americans to understand that being pro-choice is not about promoting sex with no consequences. Many women have conceived while using some method of birth control. Other than abstinence, no method is fool-proof.

But even if a pregnancy is the result of carelessness, the consequences are visited most profoundly, directly, immediately and eternally upon the woman, for an act of both partners. Accordingly, it should forever be her right to choose what is appropriate for her own physical person. Our bodies are the first and most sacred of all that we will ever own. I share this story as an example of one fortunate woman who, at a very confusing time in her life, was surrounded by people, especially her mate, who never questioned this very basic fact of life.

It is unbelievable to me that these sacred choices are now the topic of political fodder once again! How did we get here? This is something I thought that we could all take for granted by the time I became a grandmother. And yet, here we are again.

I was blessed to deliver a healthy, beautiful son, who is still the first delight of my life. And he is now the father of a beautiful son. I have shared this story with him for several reasons. First, I would not want him to hear this story from anyone else because it is not a secret and I am not ashamed of exercising my legal right to choose. I don’t want him to be afraid or ashamed of any part of his life, or how it came to be. He knows he wasn’t planned, but he was not an accident either. He was wanted and welcomed and loved every day of his life.

But the most important reason I tell my son this story, is to honor his father and his courageous, yet empowering surrender. I want him to be proud of his father, who has always wanted him, and assumed most of the responsibilities of raising him as I pursued my education. I want him to know of this personal example in his own life, of how to respect and honor women.

I asked permission from my son and his father before posting this story. It is their story and their privacy too. Even though Bob and I are long since parted, I am glad for all that he brought to my life, most especially our son, our beautiful baby, who we chose to bring into this world together. For all of our ups and downs and learning curves, we will always be family. And that is a very good thing.

I chose to have a family. I chose to open my heart. I chose to take this risk and take on the responsibility of parenthood. I am not a perfect parent. Who is? But, parenthood was something I chose, not something imposed upon me by fate, or by a society still largely governed by men. Men who, unlike Bob, cannot see past themselves enough to respect the women of this country to make the choices they see fit regarding the most personal and profound aspects of our lives.

I will always support Planned Parenthood because I will always be grateful to this organization for being supportive and compassionate at a time when I needed it most. And I will always be grateful that I was afforded a legal choice that was respected by those close to me, as well as my community. I want my granddaughters to have this same choice. I hope they don’t have to fight for it still, when they become grandmothers.

THE BITTERSWEET HARVEST OF GRIEF

 

            I am not myself lately. October 30, 2012, will mark the 6 month anniversary of my mother’s death. It will also be just over two months since the death of my Uncle John, who was my hero ever since I was a little girl. His widow, my Aunt Bertha is recovering from surgery on the brain tumor that was found several weeks before my mother got sick. She is doing well, even though she has suffered tremendous loss, and is almost 90 years old. October 10 is the 24^th anniversary of my older brother’s death.

            Almost exactly a year before my mom died, I lost one of the best friends I’ve ever had since I was 19 years old.  A few months prior to that, one of my two cats got sick and subsequently had to be put down. Within a few weeks, the other cat died, I think, of sheer loneliness. Even though they were not from the same litter, I got both of them when they were just kittens, and they were best friends. They were my best friends too. Before I got married, they used to sleep at my head and feet. I was always careful moving around when I woke up because I didn’t want to accidentally kick one of them.

            In the midst of all of that, I also lost a couple of good friends I had made along the way. I am also now estranged from my brother, the only other surviving member of my family of origin. In the past few months I have come to realize that I really lost him a long time ago. I love him so much it hurts, and I know that he is simply not the same person I knew as my first best friend. We were babies together. But now I realize that he let me go a long time ago. I guess holding on was too painful for him for too long. We both grew up amidst a great deal of trauma and violence. I fear the darkness has overtaken him, and he chooses to stay there. I can’t be there with him.

            So here I am. I would be foolish to think that I am alone because I know that I am not. First and foremost, I am loved by the most wonderful son to ever walk the face of the earth, and the most brilliant grandson known to man. I live with my husband and our beautiful black lab, Maggie, whose unconditional love and forgiveness sustain me daily. I am not alone, but I am an orphan now. It really isn’t like the end of a chapter in a book, it is the end of that whole book.

            I’ve lost people before now, but somehow, grieving my mother’s death is an incorporation of all the other grief I’ve ever experienced. Pardon the pun, but it is the mother of all grief, in all ways imaginable. She held all the memories. She saved every card or letter written to her. I have been going through some of them and remembering. Remembering people, places, events, pets, friends, school, church. Everything.

            I am a very different person than my mother was. I have a professional degree and license that have freed me from many of the demons of self-doubt with which our entire family has struggled. She didn’t drive and was often very reclusive, yet could be the life of the party in the right moment. She had a certain a gleam of joy in her beautiful brown eyes that I will never see again. She often drove me crazy, but she was also such a delight to be with because she was unabashed in her insistence on celebrating life. Even through all of her hardships, she had a great big smile that seemed to mock the hard times, especially in photographs with her family. It was as though she was saying to life, ‘I’m going to be happy anyway!’

In many ways, I have surpassed what dreams she had for me, and I know that she was proud of me, as only a mother can be. As she watched me overcome obstacles that were just too great for her, I hope that she felt some release from the bondage of all of her fears. Now that my son is an adult, I know the sense of relief she had when all of her children were on their own, working, getting educations that she could only dream of, and making our way in the world.

            As I mourn her, and her first-born, on this cloudy October day in LA, I am grateful for the distance between my origins and my life now. And I am grateful for the foundation, the hearth, that my mother created, that I so often took for granted. As difficult as this day is for me, I am grateful for everything, and I am left to wrestle with the emotional juxtaposition of loss and love and memory.

            You see, for me, grief is just another form of gratitude; for we do not miss those people or things that do bring some goodness and joy into our lives. My mournful tears are another way of saying thank you. Thank you to my brother, who was the best teacher I ever had. Without the foundational learning I got from him, I don’t make it to UCLA. Thank you to my Uncle John, my war hero, who served as a male role model in a fatherless home. Thank you to my dear friend, Leo, who loved me always and unconditionally, from a time when I really didn’t have it together. Thank you to my cats, for their warm bodies and sweet companionship. Thank you to all the many friends I have outlived to this point. Thank you for loving me.

            And most especially, thank you, Mama, for everything – my life (which she saved by carrying me out of a burning building), my education, and your constant interest and faith in me. Thank you for all the turkeys you cooked, for teaching me how to cook, for all the sacrifices you made so that I could have – a new dress, a doll, a book. Thank you for last Christmas, when you shared the good memories of your wedding day, December 23, 1950; and how the three surviving members of our family had a very merry little Christmas in the home that you bought with your divorce settlement money. Who would have known that it would be our last one together? And mostly, Mamacita mia, my chapita, thank you for the hearth -- not just a home, but a hearth – that you created for us, to share and to pass on to my son and his family.

            As I prepare for the upcoming holidays – Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years’ Day – holidays that were always celebrated at our house, albeit pretty modestly; I am filled with both dread and joy. This is my first holiday season without my mother, and sometimes I think that I will be swallowed whole by the grief-monster that lives inside my soul these days. But I now realize how challenging and scary her life was at times, and I see her as my role model. I hear her telling me, “It’s okay, Mi’ja. It’s okay,” and I know that if she could face her challenges with her limited resources, financially and emotionally; then I can go on from here. There will be a cornucopia of tears and laughter in the coming months as I celebrate with the people and dogs that I love. For the harvest of grief begins and ends with gratitude.

           

 

M. Irene Daniel

October 10, 2012

 

 

The Afternoon in Autumn

THE AFTERNOON IN AUTUMN

The afternoon in autumn

Is often still and deep

Even children’s laughter

With wisdom, seems to speak.

 

The long and lingering shadows,

Getting longer by the day,

Remind us that, like summer,

All things will pass away.

 

And in that somewhat sacred space,

Between the light and dark,

The warming glow inspires us

To be, to leave our mark.

 

A child, a tree, a manuscript,

Hard-fought battles won,

What will be remembered

When the day is done?

 

Someday I’ll be gone from here

No longer moved by fall

Joy and sorrow become one

Or you have not lived at all. 

 

                                                                        M. Irene Daniel, 2012

WHO SAYS THE DEBATES DON'T MATTER

WHO SAYS DEBATES DON’T MATTER?

            It seems that many voices in the media are downplaying the importance of the upcoming presidential debates, claiming that voters don’t make decisions based upon debate performance. Indeed, even the candidates are attempting to create lowered expectations of their respective performances. Why would these candidates warn voters not to expect too much, if there was not already an expectation in the mind of the American voter?  While I agree that debate performances matter most when they tend to reinforce an already existing perception of that candidate, I disagree wholeheartedly with those who suggest that these televised debate performances do not significantly influence voters.

            Let’s look at some examples from my own lifetime, starting with the Kennedy-Nixon debates of 1960, the first nationally televised presidential debate. Those who heard that first debate on the radio thought that Nixon outperformed Kennedy, while those viewing on television gave the win to Kennedy. Nixon, now famously, refused make-up, and his perspiring 5 o’clock shadow was uninspiring. Kennedy, on the other hand, sought out tips from his, then brother-in-law, actor Peter Lawford. He understood the power of performance and perception, and how reality can be manipulated to produce the desired perception. He was, after all, the son of Joe Kennedy, movie producer. Some still say that it was style over substance that gave Kennedy the advantage, but what style and charm he did have; as well as the ability to understand unspoken communication and use this understanding to maximize his potential.

            It was, again, a masterful performance, by a trained and skilled professional performer, that created the image of a strong and self-confident Ronald Reagan, versus the somewhat beleaguered image of President Carter. Although, intellectually, Reagan was no match for Carter, it is not always about being the smartest guy in the room. It is a performance, and the debater who outperforms the other does so, not by intellect or charm alone, but by being able to understand, and deliver, the whole package – intelligence, wit, charm and confidence.

            My favorite, and in my opinion the most distinguishing and revealing, moment in presidential debate history, came in 1992, during the Town Hall style debate between President Bush and challenger Bill Clinton. This debate also reveals yet another key ingredient in assessing debate performances, and that is the format. Different people have different styles that work better with certain formats; and Bill Clinton’s style fit this format like a glove, with his folksy and familiar, yet professionally credible, charm and above-average people skills. First of all, there was President Bush’s very telling gesture of looking at his watch a couple of times, suggesting that he was dying to get out of there. But the most game-changing moment in a presidential debate that I have ever witnessed was that moment when a young woman asked both candidates how they had been personally affected by the recession. This is where the silver-spooners are clearly at a disadvantage, when it comes to understanding the everyday lives of middle-class, mainstream Americans.

            President Bush looked dumbfounded, as he seemed groping for words and finally said, “I don’t get it.” I was actually stunned that a man of such sophistication and decades of public service could not come up with something better at that moment. But that was only the beginning of the end. When Clinton’s time came to answer, I could almost see him lickin’ his chops. First, his body language was 180 degrees to that of H.W. Bush, as he repositioned himself to move closer to the inquiring mind that asked the question. Then he lowered his tone of voice and spoke directly to the young woman, explaining how he understood the pain people were experiencing, and how he knew most of the people in Arkansas who had lost businesses. His answer, in all ways that perception can be measured, was an absolute grand slam! I remember watching this whole thing transpire with my mouth gaping open, as I said to myself, “Bush just lost this election.” In less than 10 minutes, President Bush, a man of considerable intellect and experience, destroyed his chances for re-election. I don’t think he ever recovered from that one question.

            So, who says the debates don’t matter?  Why would 60 million viewers tune in to something that doesn’t matter? Why would networks and advertisers give the viewers this opportunity if it didn’t matter?

            I think these debates this year will matter more than ever, especially with the advent and proliferation of social media, which can send zingers and bloopers across the universe in an instant. Sometimes, like that debate in 1992, a moment is captured and frozen in time before another, and overriding image can debunk it. And we know that the twitter-verse will be working overtime, exchanging perspectives and images, and influencing whomever they can. I’ll be watching. I can hardly wait to see what history is made this year.

Why the Akin Mess Matters

WHY THE AKIN MESS MATTERS

            Unless you were on Mars for the past couple of days, you have no doubt become aware of the comments made by Congressman, and Senatorial candidate, Todd Akin of Missouri, regarding “legitimate” rape, and how these particular kind of rapes rarely result in pregnancy. To some, this is just another gaff made by a politician in a brutal political year. To others, it is an insult to women, especially rape victims. And for still others, Congressman Akin’s comments reflect their belief, not that pregnancy by rape is rare, but that a fertilized egg is a human life and must be afforded constitutional protection.  Well, it certainly is more than just a gaffe; it is an extreme insult to women; and it does speak to the personhood issue. So, all of the above are relevant to this discussion.

            That this was more than a gaffe is pretty obvious, as evidenced by the fact that the Republican party has thrown Akin under the bus, and are trying mightily to distance themselves from his statement. However, is this really that much more offensive -- and just plain wrong --  than other statements made by Republicans denigrating women? Or the legion examples of the outright racism that has become the stalwart of the GOP of late?  Is this more offensive than the ridiculous “birther” nonsense advocated by those intellectual heavy hitters of the Republican party, namely Donald Trump and Joe “Bull Connor” Arpaio? More offensive than calling a law student a whore? More offensive than that other intellectual giant, Joe the Plumber, suggesting immigration solutions for Arizona, like building a wall and then to start shooting? What is so different about Akin’s comments that he is now the political pariah of the moment? I’m not so sure.

             It is clear that the Republicans want to distance themselves from Todd Akin. But why not from all the other people mentioned above? It is also clear that the GOP is not doing as well as they thought they might be doing, especially with women and ethnic minorities, lately polling at ZERO with African-Americans.  Perhaps they are starting to read the handwriting on the wall and realize that their party can’t win elections by alienating themselves from huge demographic constituencies, like women, blacks, Mexicans, etc. Since their efforts at deliberate and fraudulent disenfranchisement of ethnic minorities and poor people (this is a subject for another blog post), have been discovered and uncovered for what they are – cheating; ethnic minorities are unlikely to move toward the GOP at this time. So, if they are to have a chance at all, they have to hang onto the white male vote (another future blog) and salvage the women’s vote, if at all possible. And they have to act quickly to get out in front and on top of the messaging.  Never mind that personhood amendments have been introduced in several states by Republican legislators, or that VP candidate, Paul Ryan has introduced legislation distinguishing between “rape” and “forcible rape.” Aside from the extraordinarily ignorant statement about how women become impregnated, the sentiment expressed by Congressman Akin was the same Republican verbal assault on women we’ve been hearing for some time now.

            Akin’s comment did, however, contain an ignorance the sort of which I have not heard since 7^th grade. His flippant remark added insult to an already injured, and growing larger by the day, demographic of women, who favor President Obama by at least 15 points in the polls. I have spoken to zero women – of different ages, ethnicities and ideologies – who were not offended by Akin’s ignorance and insensitivity. Reactions ranged from moral outrage to shock and utter disbelief.  Most men I know were also, at least, taken aback by these comments. And this man has daughters?

            The women I spoke to who were most offended were victims of rape and sexual assault, as well you might imagine. The word “legitimate” suggests that some rapes might be “illegitimate,” which suggests one of 2 things: 1) That there are occasions that women claim to be raped, but really weren’t; or that 2) women will demand abortions, falsely claiming rape, just so they can qualify for an exception to a complete ban on abortions, enabling them to terminate their pregnancies. Either way, it suggests that we women simply can’t be trusted tell the truth, or even to know what rape is.  Apparently suggestion wasn’t enough for Idaho Republican Chuck Winder, who said just that:  that women don’t know what rape is. Well, if women don’t know, how do these men know what rape is? Why is it that these men have to pretend that they know everything about everything when they don’t?  Even conservative women that I know are embarrassed and a little afraid of what a bunch of stingy, mean-spirited and arrogant ignoramuses the Republicans have become.

            What is the most troubling from my vantage point, is the outrageous and scientifically baseless claim coming from someone who, not only does not know what he is talking about, but delivers his ignorant remarks with a very condescending, demeaning and paternalistic attitude toward women. This false sense of superiority allows men like Akin to discount our credibility and suffocate us with their macho need to dominate us, all the while claiming to protect us. We are not stupid. We are not making up lies in order to get abortions. How people like this get elected is beyond me.             

Why is it that women always seem to be the absolute last in line when it comes to being recognized as having any rights at all? We know that true equality between the sexes is nonexistent at this time. Women earn slightly more than 75% of what a man makes for the same work. And now, we are not to be afforded a say over a zygote that cannot survive without the most internal resources of our own bodies? This form of life, exclusively dependent upon our insides to even have a chance at life, should enjoy constitutional protections that an actual, real (not potential), in the flesh, live woman does not? Preposterous!

This situation clearly underscores the need for women to step up efforts to elect strong and smart women to political office, as well as empowering young women by encouraging them to pursue educations and careers in all areas of life. 

            We need to get out there and educate the men who obviously don’t know what they don’t know. It is up to us.

I HONOR MY BLEEDING HEART

            I am, unabashedly, a “bleeding heart liberal.”  I am neither proud, nor ashamed of that fact.  It just is.  Even though I grew up in a Roman Catholic household and still observe many Catholic rituals, such as burning votive candles with images of the Virgin Mary and, yes Jesus’ sacred bleeding heart, my personal faith takes on more of a Taoist nature these days.   In my study of other religions and disciplines, I gain a greater and more complete understanding of Jesus of Nazareth, the man, not the myth.

            I grew up poor in a small rural American town in the 1960’s.  My family was on welfare for a time and my brothers and I were able to take advantage of the many great and sustaining programs of Lyndon Johnson’s ‘Great Society,’ starting with, the then brand new, Project Headstart.  I was ten  years old and my teenage brother, who landed a job as a TA, took me with him to work to volunteer there, reading to little kids and playing with them. This was my first experience in giving back to my community and would plant the seed that told me I would always need to give something of myself to others because, no matter what I was going through, there would always be someone out there who needed whatever I had to offer.  I learned that being human was about asking for help when I needed it, and always giving whatever I had to offer of myself to others, also in need.  I learned that what goes around, comes around and that no one person is superior to another.

            As I grew up, there would be more encounters with assistance from government programs:  job corps gave me work and a paycheck when I was an awkward adolescent, pell grants, loans, scholarships, as well as affirmative action opportunities (for which I make no apologies to anyone) all along the way provided a pathway to UCLA Law School and greater opportunities for success, not just for me, but for countless others.  I learned useful skills, met many people who would write letters of recommendation in support of my future endeavors, earned my own keep, started paying taxes at the age of thirteen, and learned how to break the shackles of hopeless poverty – one link at a time.

            I have tried to explain to my conservative friends how these opportunities, engineered by the genius of Sargent Shriver -- forever my hero, created layers upon layers of tax payers and job creators.  I always get the same answer – it was just too expensive, i.e., not worth it.  The implication being that they resented their tax dollars contributing to my success, as it left less in their pocketbooks.  I suppose they would have preferred that I spend my life in domestic labors, as did my grandmother and my mother.  I would be paying a lot less in taxes if that were the case, and I could not have created the jobs and other opportunities that I have created in my legal career, as well as through my participation in various volunteer efforts and non-profit board responsibilities through the years.  And that’s just my story!  I also had two brothers who also benefitted from the Great Society, and went on to further education, jobs, and volunteer activities; from mentoring and tutoring students, to volunteering for Amnesty International and Catholic charities.  We didn’t ever just take.  As we were receiving with one hand, we were giving of ourselves with the other.  My story is not unique.  It is one of millions that speak of learning to give and receive and to honor ourselves by giving back to what gave to us.  As a young lawyer, I met others who had reaped like benefits, and extended friendship and opportunity to me – a cycle of giving and sharing.  For when we give, we create more – more learning, more sharing, more loving and, of course, more money – for everybody.

            It appears to me, that whatever benefit was spent on my family over a decade of time has been more than paid back, and not just in dollars and cents.  Between the three of us siblings, we have more than paid it back just with our tax liability over the past forty years.  But beyond that, we have volunteered hours upon hours of our time to those whose needs we could not ignore, as we recognized our own story in those we assisted and encouraged in many ways.  Certainly, by any empirical measure, our communities – local, state and national, have been repaid multiple times over, not just with dollars, but with volunteer effort – blood, sweat and tears.

            So, all of this leaves me beyond puzzled.  How did the term “bleeding heart” become such a nasty term?  I am not ashamed of my bleeding heart, and I wouldn’t imagine that Jesus would be ashamed of His.  So, why is it considered evil and stupid to care about what happens to other people?  Is it because they see this as a waste?  I cannot deny accusations of waste and abuse and fraud.  I only know my own story, and it is one of plenty created from lack, with just a little bit of support and encouragement from my government – my President, my Congress, my local elected officials.  I felt motivated to honor the efforts of those who created this opportunity for me.  I felt cared about by my community when I was growing up.  Children growing up in poverty today don’t have that same experience.  They are looked down upon and hear people in suits call their parents worthless and lazy.

            This brings me to the crux of the matter.  For me, identifying as a “Christian” is not about ritual or dogma; it is about being like Jesus.  Acting like Jesus, healing like Jesus, sharing like Jesus, loving others, like Jesus did -- unconditionally and without judgment.  You see, being like Jesus has nothing to do with homosexuality, or condemnation of others, or judging others whose experiences  and perspectives may differ; but with actually caring about how people feel and caring about what happens to them.  I can pray and meditate all day long, staring at a likeness of Jesus with his bleeding heart; but if I am unconcerned about those in my community with unmet needs, well then, I’m just wasting God’s time.  I have a bleeding heart because I care if people in my community eat, have a safe place to sleep, have some hope in their lives.  I could never be ashamed of that sentiment that I share with the Son of Man, the Prince of Peace.