Jean Mitchell, age 92, died today.
Who was Jean? Why should I care? Why should you care?
Jean was a very special lady. Her son, Mike was one of George's best friends in college and after. But Jean (and her surviving husband, Frank) were not "parents" to the group of friends who first met at Fullerton JC. Jean and Frank were part of the group. They were friends, not "Mike's parents" They were our peers, if not in age, in attitude, in mind, in willingness to explore, discuss, examine life and everything around it.
Being around Jean never felt like being around my mother or my mother's friends. Being with Jean was like being with any of my girlfriends.
Jean lived 92 years, but Jean was never old. Jean was always the age of the people she was with.
There is a hole in my heart and in my life tonight.
Jean, I miss you.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Kids
People sometimes ask me why I never had children.
Early on in my marriage, I would reply "No child deserves me as a parent." Later, my response became, "Because I am too selfish." Both comments are equally true.
I never felt that I would make a good parent. Just as I did not acquire a driver's licence until I was 20, because I did not feel that I was capable of assuming control over something as potentially deadly as a car, I did not feel that what I believed about child-rearing would produce a good child/adult.
Our resonsibility to our children is also our responsibility to society as a whole. We owe our children the duty to teach them to easily and properly function in society. We owe society children who will function properly within society.
I honestly did not feel capable of fulfilling those goals.
At one point in our marriage, I offered my husband (who I feel would have made and EXCELLENT father) a divorce so that he could find someone who would give him children.
And I was selfish. I did not want to share my husband with other beings who had equal claim on his time, his attention, his love. Heck, there were times I was jealous of the cat!! If I could not accept his telling the cat "I love you.", how was I ever going to accept a child?? I was selfish. I am selfish.
So, no kids, no carrying on of the family name. This branch on the family tree dies.
Oh, wow. And that is one p*ss poor reason for having kids. "Don't let the family name die." WHY NOT?? My husband's family has plenty of descendents to honor the name (Thanks to great-grandpa and his six or seven wives) And frankly, why honor the past? In China, there was a cult of ancestry. And what of the current generations?
There is nothing wrong with geneology. What is wrong is defining yourself solely by what your ancestors accomplished.
I would rather be known for who I am today than for who I am descended from. My ancestory may matter to me, but it does not define me. I am defined by who I am, what I have done, and what I leave behind me.
And since I have no children, if I want to be remembered, it will be my reputation, for good or for ill that defines me after death.
Early on in my marriage, I would reply "No child deserves me as a parent." Later, my response became, "Because I am too selfish." Both comments are equally true.
I never felt that I would make a good parent. Just as I did not acquire a driver's licence until I was 20, because I did not feel that I was capable of assuming control over something as potentially deadly as a car, I did not feel that what I believed about child-rearing would produce a good child/adult.
Our resonsibility to our children is also our responsibility to society as a whole. We owe our children the duty to teach them to easily and properly function in society. We owe society children who will function properly within society.
I honestly did not feel capable of fulfilling those goals.
At one point in our marriage, I offered my husband (who I feel would have made and EXCELLENT father) a divorce so that he could find someone who would give him children.
And I was selfish. I did not want to share my husband with other beings who had equal claim on his time, his attention, his love. Heck, there were times I was jealous of the cat!! If I could not accept his telling the cat "I love you.", how was I ever going to accept a child?? I was selfish. I am selfish.
So, no kids, no carrying on of the family name. This branch on the family tree dies.
Oh, wow. And that is one p*ss poor reason for having kids. "Don't let the family name die." WHY NOT?? My husband's family has plenty of descendents to honor the name (Thanks to great-grandpa and his six or seven wives) And frankly, why honor the past? In China, there was a cult of ancestry. And what of the current generations?
There is nothing wrong with geneology. What is wrong is defining yourself solely by what your ancestors accomplished.
I would rather be known for who I am today than for who I am descended from. My ancestory may matter to me, but it does not define me. I am defined by who I am, what I have done, and what I leave behind me.
And since I have no children, if I want to be remembered, it will be my reputation, for good or for ill that defines me after death.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
"Our SOB"
Watching the events in Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan and Yemen, I am reminded of a story that dates back to the Truman administration. In a discussion of a dictator somewhere, an advisor commented that the man in questions was an DOB.. Truman purportedly replied, "Yes, but he's our SOB."
That sums up what is wrong about American Foreign policy. It was wrong during the cold war, and now that the cold war has ended, it is even more wrong.
An SOB is generally considered (as a National leader) to be autocratic, dictatorial, uncaring about human rights or the welfare of his people.
By supporting leaders who can be described in this fashion, the US is setting ourselves up for more trouble with the country in the future. Eventually, events will topple or remove that leader. What then? The bulk of the populace does NOT view the US as a friend. We supported and propped up the leader they have now deposed. As far as the general population of the country is concerned, the US does not care about human rights, education, the rights of women or minorities, or even spurring the democratic process.
Mubarek came to power 30 years ago. For the first ten years, the US could believe his statements that his was a democratic government. But when the same individual wins election after election, the US just might want to start requesting evidence that the country is a democracy.
Oddly enough, the limit of two terms on the president in this country has prevented (since FDR) the rise of a strong-man rule. There have been two-term presidents since FDR who might have been lured into running for a third term.
So, when the US is evaluating the quality of the democratic ideals esposed abroad, one of the issues we need to be aware of is whether there is a limit on the number of terms an executive can serve.
It won't solve the problem, but if ther US were to become a large bit more cautious about our support for the SOBs of this world, in the long run, we would be better preceived by the people they rule.
That sums up what is wrong about American Foreign policy. It was wrong during the cold war, and now that the cold war has ended, it is even more wrong.
An SOB is generally considered (as a National leader) to be autocratic, dictatorial, uncaring about human rights or the welfare of his people.
By supporting leaders who can be described in this fashion, the US is setting ourselves up for more trouble with the country in the future. Eventually, events will topple or remove that leader. What then? The bulk of the populace does NOT view the US as a friend. We supported and propped up the leader they have now deposed. As far as the general population of the country is concerned, the US does not care about human rights, education, the rights of women or minorities, or even spurring the democratic process.
Mubarek came to power 30 years ago. For the first ten years, the US could believe his statements that his was a democratic government. But when the same individual wins election after election, the US just might want to start requesting evidence that the country is a democracy.
Oddly enough, the limit of two terms on the president in this country has prevented (since FDR) the rise of a strong-man rule. There have been two-term presidents since FDR who might have been lured into running for a third term.
So, when the US is evaluating the quality of the democratic ideals esposed abroad, one of the issues we need to be aware of is whether there is a limit on the number of terms an executive can serve.
It won't solve the problem, but if ther US were to become a large bit more cautious about our support for the SOBs of this world, in the long run, we would be better preceived by the people they rule.
Monday, January 24, 2011
If You Don't Know How
I work at the local food bank.
Much of the food that we distribute is commodities - surplus foods that we get for free. We never know what we will get, or sometimes even the quantities.
Once, the person who places the order saw an item of "Beef ribs" She wisely only ordered one quantity. If this had been packages of 1 to 5 lbs each of ribs, it is something we would have ordered in quantity. However, in this instance, it was a single, 15 to 20 pound side of beef ribs. Basically, it was the entire 1/2 rib cage of a steer. For a resturant, great. For a food bank, not so great. We were lucky. That day one of the familys we were giving food out to had several teenage males. They were more than happy to take the frozen ribs. Of course, they had to be thawed and cut into at least two sections before they would fit in a home oven or on a home grill. But we never ordered those ribs again.
Today we received a lot of boxes of ground beef. Good, you say? Think about it. What youd YOU do with five pounds of hamburger. FROZEN SOLID. Yes, we gave a lot of it out. But I have to wonder --can you thaw frozen hamburger, re-package it and re-freeze it and still have it be safe?
I've started trying to find easy, simple recipies we can give out with some of the food. So far, I've done three different chicken ones. I try to stick with no more than five ingredients, meat, onions, potatoes, and hopefully anythng else is eighter on hand in most households or costs next to nothing.
My friends know that I love to cook. But finding simple recipies, ones that don't use fancy cheese, exotic spice, heavy cream-- that is more of a challenge.
Think about the simplest thing you might prepare -- let's take a grilled cheese sandwich -- What goes into it? OK, on the most basic level, bread, cheese and butter or margarine. Sometimes at the food bank we have both bread and cheese. Butter or margarine are another and far rarer matter. And here in New Mexico, a grilled cheese sandwich is NOT complete without green chile. That's four ingredients so far. Some people like a bit of mayo on the bread next to the cheese. I like to grill a slice of ham and throw it in too. (of course, that's a grilled hame-and-cheese) But even a simple dish may easily take ingredients that may not be found in the household of someone who is getting food at a food bank.
Trying to simplify recipies and make them fit in the likely household resources is a challenge.
Will I meet the challenge? I don't know. Last week was chicken and rice. I found two or three recipies that might serve. I copied them and we gave them out with the chicken.
Next Monday, I need to figure out what to do with five pounds of frozen ground beef.
I welcome your ideas.
Much of the food that we distribute is commodities - surplus foods that we get for free. We never know what we will get, or sometimes even the quantities.
Once, the person who places the order saw an item of "Beef ribs" She wisely only ordered one quantity. If this had been packages of 1 to 5 lbs each of ribs, it is something we would have ordered in quantity. However, in this instance, it was a single, 15 to 20 pound side of beef ribs. Basically, it was the entire 1/2 rib cage of a steer. For a resturant, great. For a food bank, not so great. We were lucky. That day one of the familys we were giving food out to had several teenage males. They were more than happy to take the frozen ribs. Of course, they had to be thawed and cut into at least two sections before they would fit in a home oven or on a home grill. But we never ordered those ribs again.
Today we received a lot of boxes of ground beef. Good, you say? Think about it. What youd YOU do with five pounds of hamburger. FROZEN SOLID. Yes, we gave a lot of it out. But I have to wonder --can you thaw frozen hamburger, re-package it and re-freeze it and still have it be safe?
I've started trying to find easy, simple recipies we can give out with some of the food. So far, I've done three different chicken ones. I try to stick with no more than five ingredients, meat, onions, potatoes, and hopefully anythng else is eighter on hand in most households or costs next to nothing.
My friends know that I love to cook. But finding simple recipies, ones that don't use fancy cheese, exotic spice, heavy cream-- that is more of a challenge.
Think about the simplest thing you might prepare -- let's take a grilled cheese sandwich -- What goes into it? OK, on the most basic level, bread, cheese and butter or margarine. Sometimes at the food bank we have both bread and cheese. Butter or margarine are another and far rarer matter. And here in New Mexico, a grilled cheese sandwich is NOT complete without green chile. That's four ingredients so far. Some people like a bit of mayo on the bread next to the cheese. I like to grill a slice of ham and throw it in too. (of course, that's a grilled hame-and-cheese) But even a simple dish may easily take ingredients that may not be found in the household of someone who is getting food at a food bank.
Trying to simplify recipies and make them fit in the likely household resources is a challenge.
Will I meet the challenge? I don't know. Last week was chicken and rice. I found two or three recipies that might serve. I copied them and we gave them out with the chicken.
Next Monday, I need to figure out what to do with five pounds of frozen ground beef.
I welcome your ideas.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!
I WANT YOUR ATTENTION!! I WANT YOU TO SEE ME, SEE WHAT I AM DOING AND TALK ABOUT ME!!
What am I doing? Nothing. Why should you watch? No reason. What should you talk about? Nothing.
And that is one of the things that lead to the tragedy on Saturday.
A possibly mentally unstable individual decided that they were not getting enough attention from the world around them and determined that shooting up someone of importance was the remedy for their insignificance.
With 500+ TV channels, Facebook, Myspace, Youtube, etc, it is easy to believe that each and every one of us either has or deserves an audience. Why do you suppose I write this blog? I could keep my own, confidential journal if I didn't feel the need for validation from others.
But when you combine the urge for an audience with an unstable personality, sometimes the results are tragic.
And the results are tragic for EVERYONE involved.
Is there an answer? I certainly do not espouse periodic mental health screenings for all. I also do not support making everyone famous for 15 minutes. Yes, Andy Warhol was correct, the media now exists for such fleeting fame.
Perhaps we need to somehow shift the qualities we most publicize and admire. Perhaps we should attempt to make famous the people who run soup kitchens, the people who help the homeless, the teachers who run after-school programs for kids at risk.
How wonderful it would be if coverage of a famous boxer focused as much on his work with inner-city kids as on his triumphs in the ring. Wouldn't it be great if the story on a multi-million dollar contract included the information that 50% of the amount received would be going to charity.
I would love to see a story on a team, one month after winning a National championship showing the members cleaning up vacant lots in their city.
I think I want to try. Instead of saying that someone plays at my golf course, I want to say that they volunteer, that they care, that they give of themselves to others.
And yes, I would like them to say the same about me.
What am I doing? Nothing. Why should you watch? No reason. What should you talk about? Nothing.
And that is one of the things that lead to the tragedy on Saturday.
A possibly mentally unstable individual decided that they were not getting enough attention from the world around them and determined that shooting up someone of importance was the remedy for their insignificance.
With 500+ TV channels, Facebook, Myspace, Youtube, etc, it is easy to believe that each and every one of us either has or deserves an audience. Why do you suppose I write this blog? I could keep my own, confidential journal if I didn't feel the need for validation from others.
But when you combine the urge for an audience with an unstable personality, sometimes the results are tragic.
And the results are tragic for EVERYONE involved.
Is there an answer? I certainly do not espouse periodic mental health screenings for all. I also do not support making everyone famous for 15 minutes. Yes, Andy Warhol was correct, the media now exists for such fleeting fame.
Perhaps we need to somehow shift the qualities we most publicize and admire. Perhaps we should attempt to make famous the people who run soup kitchens, the people who help the homeless, the teachers who run after-school programs for kids at risk.
How wonderful it would be if coverage of a famous boxer focused as much on his work with inner-city kids as on his triumphs in the ring. Wouldn't it be great if the story on a multi-million dollar contract included the information that 50% of the amount received would be going to charity.
I would love to see a story on a team, one month after winning a National championship showing the members cleaning up vacant lots in their city.
I think I want to try. Instead of saying that someone plays at my golf course, I want to say that they volunteer, that they care, that they give of themselves to others.
And yes, I would like them to say the same about me.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Fairness, Honor, Integrity and Money
Five players from Ohio State have received a punishment of suspension for the first five games of NEXT season. They will be allowed to play in this year's post-season bowl.
Their coach announced that they had all PROMISED that they will return next year and carry out the suspension. (Of course, the university has also appealed the penalty -- after all, if they play and win their bowl game, there is a chance the NCAA will reduce the penalty and they will get to play most of next season)
The coach felt that it would not be "fair" to keep them out a bowl game that they had "earned" by their play this season.
Whether you feel that the NCAA rules that they violated are fair or not is not part of THIS discussion.
They PROMISED that they will return. What holds them to that promise?
Fairness, honor, integrity and morality should hold them to that promise.
Is that enough? Will it hold?
If an NFL team offers any of these young men a contract for next season, what will keep them from accepting?
Honor, Integrity, Morality.
Is that enough?
If I owned an NFL team, would I want to employ someone who would take a public stand, then disavow it for financial gain? What does that tell me about the employee?
Frankly, there are NFL owners who have shown that they do not care about the honor of their team, the honor of the game, or anything except their own egos being stroked by winning.
So, where do you think these guys will be playing next year?
Ohio State?
Dallas?
Oakland?
Their coach announced that they had all PROMISED that they will return next year and carry out the suspension. (Of course, the university has also appealed the penalty -- after all, if they play and win their bowl game, there is a chance the NCAA will reduce the penalty and they will get to play most of next season)
The coach felt that it would not be "fair" to keep them out a bowl game that they had "earned" by their play this season.
Whether you feel that the NCAA rules that they violated are fair or not is not part of THIS discussion.
They PROMISED that they will return. What holds them to that promise?
Fairness, honor, integrity and morality should hold them to that promise.
Is that enough? Will it hold?
If an NFL team offers any of these young men a contract for next season, what will keep them from accepting?
Honor, Integrity, Morality.
Is that enough?
If I owned an NFL team, would I want to employ someone who would take a public stand, then disavow it for financial gain? What does that tell me about the employee?
Frankly, there are NFL owners who have shown that they do not care about the honor of their team, the honor of the game, or anything except their own egos being stroked by winning.
So, where do you think these guys will be playing next year?
Ohio State?
Dallas?
Oakland?
Sunday, December 19, 2010
The Keystrokes of Your Life
Is your life measured by keystrokes? Do you feeled compelled to tweet, text, and post on a daily or even hourly basis in order to assure yourself and the electronic world around you that you exist?
A friend of mine has a brother who has over 3,000 facebook "friends". How many of them do you suppose he knows? How many of them does he care about? How many of them care about him?
3,000 "friends"?
I doubt that I am acquainted with 3,000 people, much less "friends" with that many. Think about the number. If an elementary school teacher taught 30 children each year for 30 years, that would be 900 students. How many of the first year class would the teacher remember by retirement? If the teacher was also acquainted with ALL of the parents of those 900 children, the total number would begin to approach 3,000. But friends?
Of course, I don't make a habit of "friending" on facebook people I do not actually know IRL. I have made ONE exception. A person whose blog I regularly follow asked the blog readers to "friend" her. There are days when her blog post is actually her facebook jottings. I have also directly communicated with her by e-mail. As I say, ONE person I have never physically met.
So, if you have 3,000 "friends", if you spend your entire day tweeting, twittering, texting, posting, e-mailing, IMing, what are you doing with your life?
Do you have a life?
Please, post and let me know.
A friend of mine has a brother who has over 3,000 facebook "friends". How many of them do you suppose he knows? How many of them does he care about? How many of them care about him?
3,000 "friends"?
I doubt that I am acquainted with 3,000 people, much less "friends" with that many. Think about the number. If an elementary school teacher taught 30 children each year for 30 years, that would be 900 students. How many of the first year class would the teacher remember by retirement? If the teacher was also acquainted with ALL of the parents of those 900 children, the total number would begin to approach 3,000. But friends?
Of course, I don't make a habit of "friending" on facebook people I do not actually know IRL. I have made ONE exception. A person whose blog I regularly follow asked the blog readers to "friend" her. There are days when her blog post is actually her facebook jottings. I have also directly communicated with her by e-mail. As I say, ONE person I have never physically met.
So, if you have 3,000 "friends", if you spend your entire day tweeting, twittering, texting, posting, e-mailing, IMing, what are you doing with your life?
Do you have a life?
Please, post and let me know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
