Equal Love

I soundly repudiate the notion that an individual cannot wholly love self, spouse, children, family and friends as much as any believer just because he or she does not believe in God. The idea that God would deny any individual full access to their own reservoir of loved based on level or nature of faith is preposterous. It's a pretty misguided individual who would need to make himself or herself feel superior based on such spurious and deluded merits.

Let's Talk About Sex, Baby

One of my dear friends related to me something about the teaching of sex among Christian communities as related to him in a religious fireside by a psychologist. In brief, she said that sex is like a pool - but one you aren't allowed to swim in, touch, go near, look at, or even think about. Then, when you get married, you're thrown into the deep end and told "have a good time!"

Men I've dated and women I've talked with have had woefully lacking or inaccurate knowledge about sex and reproduction. Women have told me stories about how frightened they were about having sex with their own husband because they were taught "it" was sinful and dirty and absolutely not to be talked about, or they told me how painful it was, or how confusing it was, or how absolutely embarrassed they felt because they had no idea what to do.

The men seem to be more familiar with the plumbing system - though most of it is admittedly learned from pornography, since mommy and daddy weren't willing to talk with them about such a needful, natural topic. I heard one man relate to me that it's supposed to hurt for a woman to get pregnant, and I thought...oh my God, those poor, poor women.

So, it seems that there's yet another prevailing myth that must needs be busted in the balls. SEX SHOULD NOT EVER EVER EVER BE PAINFUL, even when it results in pregnancy. Ladies, go see your gynecologist if you experience pain with intercourse; You men who think it's "normal" or "okay" for your sexual partner to be in pain while you jack off inside her body, you are monstrously wrong. It is NOT normal for ANY woman to hurt during sex, and it isn't ever "okay". If she is hurting and you aren't in a consenting sado-masochistic union, then something is wrong. Get her to a doctor so you two can figure out how to make it pleasurable FOR THE BOTH OF YOU.

Gender Equality: The Workplace

THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION

I'm always of two minds about articles focusing on disparity between men and women in politics, the workplace, or the developed world in general. I know that there are instances in which sex discrimination has occurred and still takes place, and it rankles me when a woman is held back based on her sex or sexual characteristics. However, in today's first-world countries, I don't think every single disappointment or difficulty a woman experiences in the workplace has basis in gender-based discrimination. To elaborate...

(1) Women make babies. As engaging in sex (read: sexual activity that is consensual) is a personal choice, as contraception, Plan B pills, and birth control are widely available, and as abortion is still legal in many areas, it is a woman's choice to bear children. It is not a disability.

Therefore, a woman becoming a mother chooses to sacrifice commitment to career that a single person, or a parent whose partner cares for their children, is able to devote. It is not a company's job to cater to someone's choice to be a parent. Businesses hire the individual whom is best for them, within the constraints of law and company policy. If another person can and does commit more of their time and effort to a job, it shouldn't be unexpected that he or she may receive compensation, promotions, and benefits in consequence.

I think I should make it clear that I respect a mother who does her best for her children. At-home mothers don't have it easy. Mothers who also have to or want to work outside the home don't have it easy. I'm saying that when your children are the priority, a company cannot be expected to compete.

(2) There are at least as many laws protecting women at work than there are men, as well as widely-implemented company policies dictating that a certain percentage of persons in specific levels of the business must be women.

Therefore, a man who is more committed or better qualified for a job may be denied one based strictly on - what? - his gender. I've seen these policies in play.

(3) The "Status Quo". Teach girls they can and should and will often have to campaign for higher positions, raises, respect, etc., if she wants to attain a higher position, raise, greater respect, etc. It seems to be assumed that someone is going to come along and offer a working woman more money or a better position just because she has earned it. In most jobs, this doesn't happen without the employee becoming his or her advocate for career or monetary advancement, regardless of gender.

A woman does not have to sacrifice her inherent nature and femininity in order to be aggressively successful. I like to be friendly and nurturing, but I'm okay with putting my career and my agenda first. My husband has to do this, too - he's a darling to me, but he's got to take care of business at work, and that means he's not everyone's bestest buddy all the time. It's okay if some people think I'm a jerk. It's okay if some people think he's a jerk. We have yet to cry ourselves to sleep at night because someone else thinks we're jerks.

Teach our girls to be every bit as determined and capable of successfully showcasing their skills, accomplishments, and assets to their superiors as we enable our boys to be. Teach them it's okay to compete with others, to win over others, and not feel they should have to apologize to others for their success. Meekness and humility before God enters you into paradisiacal rest when you die. Meekness and humility before the employer who has three other candidates competing for the job you want is going to get you nowhere while you still live and breathe.

Self-Appointed Divine Justices

I was disappointed with people during the time when the death of Robin Williams was announced. Along with a lot of my Facebook friends casting grossly unfair aspersions on his character, a popular Christian blogger I haven't followed since called suicide cowardly.

It hit pretty close to home. People were quite literally damning a man none of them actually knew beyond his celebrity status. Even before it came out that he was on heavy medications and suffering from a terrifying incurable disease, otherwise decent people were firm in their unGodly minds that his place in Hell was certain.

Amidst this astonishing throng of ill-conceived judgment, one of my more thoughtful friends posted a link to a beautiful talk by one of my religious leaders: Suicide: Some Things We Know, Some We Do Not, by Elder M. Russell Ballard . To quote in part his speech, which I highly advise everyone to read in full, he states;

“Obviously, we do not know the full circumstances surrounding every suicide. Only the Lord knows all the details, and he it is who will judge our actions here on earth.

When he does judge us, I feel he will take all things into consideration: our genetic and chemical makeup, our mental state, our intellectual capacity, the teachings we have received, the traditions of our fathers, our health, and so forth.”

It's so very fortunate for many people I know that they have not had to experience what it is to be diagnosed with a big word for a disease that they may never be free of. A condition that may eventually strip them of even their most basic faculties and capacities, trapping them effectively inside a broken body, their mind still active but unable to communicate with the world around it. A disease that cripples them so badly that someone has to feed them, bathe them, and wipe their ass like a helpless infant.

Introduce such a trying ordeal to heavy medication - and all psychiatric medication comes with the risks of creating a more unstable and erratic biochemistry - and isn't it easy to understand why even such a recognizably great man could be tempted beyond his ability to resist?

This is not a post about supporting suicide. This is a post about not judging others, and perhaps being a little kinder to them. I think if people would see chronic physical or mental illness for what it's really like - being brutally, endlessly tortured by a vicious attacker you can't defend against and have no hope of escaping - perhaps the response to such would be better in line with these self-righteous people who haven't even had to dream about what it's like to experience consistent lack of comfort and ability.

Beauty

This began as a comment I was going to post on a friend of mine's Facebook page. She had posted two status updates in two days about how someone had judged her appearance negatively. Now, it's a commentary on my blog about people and perspective.

Don't you find it odd to note that, even though as a society we have wildly diverging personal opinions on just about everything else, we each somehow develop extraordinarily similar opinions of what a beautiful woman (or man) should consist of?

I theorize one reason is that our personal proclivities, if they do not initially agree with the 6'0 120lb 32-DD Aphrodite or the Dorito-torsoed washboard-abbed Adonis, are methodically "shamed" out of us. I have a lot of brothers, and I noticed that if a maturing male among the group showed an interest in a girl who, for instance, was perfectly normal and ranging on the high end of an average BMI, he'd be accused of liking 'fatties' as if her size was an embarrassment; or if the girl in question had less-than-remarkable breasts, he'd be teased because he liked his women "boyish", and therefore he was totally a "homo".

Women may tend to be more subtle when expressing their judgments, but we both know how easy it is to pick up on another female's opinion of our bodies, choices, or personal inclinations regardless of whether or not she vocalizes it.

The false media archetype - or the "Photoshop standard", as I refer to it - of what beauty should consist of has been integrated into the cultural subconscious, and it takes conscious effort to stop deconstructing ourselves and others by some faked axiom of perfection on the cover of a magazine - an airbrushed perfection which is not attainable in nature. Of course, it's perfectly acceptable to find the tall, slender, and busty to be beautiful; that's kind of my build, and I'm equally fed up with the nasty looks and 'eat a sandwich' comments from other perfectly acceptable women of shapes and sizes that differ from mine.

What we find appealing in the gender toward which we feel attracted is intimately related with our sexual identities, and is accordingly personal and delicate. To have our healthy, natural inclinations bastardized and opposed from their very first debut can be deeply mortifying. People often ascribe terms like 'fetishist' to an individual attracted to something that varies from the standard; therefore, in order to avoid a term that labels a man or woman as deviant from the current social norm, his or her original predispositions may be suppressed, therefore allowing the standard opinion of what it is proper to desire to perpetuate unchallenged.

So, I guess that in short, perception of personal beauty and the beauty of others begins much as the rest of us does - fragile, and requiring of nurture and support to thrive. When we deny ourselves, or the individuals who have our love and trust don't contribute, more acceptance and encouragement than the Standard erodes, it's easy to be drawn into the endless discontent created by denying ourselves honest expression and attempting to achieve unrealistic expectations.

Of course, none of us should value or be valued strictly by outward appeal; but every now and then we all want to feel as though others recognize that we possess physical beauty. And, curiously and marvelously, one of the surest ways to see the beauty of ourselves is to recognize and address the beauty of others. The more we permit ourselves to accept as beautiful, the more beauty we feel permitted to accept about ourselves.

"Modesty"

I appreciate that this article states that, "overemphasizing modesty can unintentionally teach that girls are responsible for boys’ sexual thoughts and behaviors." A few years ago, I took my brothers to a widely-attended religious conference for young people aged 14-19. One of the speakers was a man in a leadership position that strongly advised that females are responsible for keeping a man's thoughts and actions pure by the way they dress. His was clearly a misguided opinion that is not part of my faith's doctrine. Therefore,

"[...]it is important to distinguish influence on another person from responsibility for another person’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. An extreme example is the classic excuse used to justify rape, “She was asking for it.” A woman dressing in a way that a man views as sexually provocative may have an influence on him, but only he is responsible for his behavior."

(1) When we reduce the concept of modesty to what females wear, we are reinforcing the very thing that modesty is supposed to help avoid: the sexual objectification of women’s bodies.

(2) Overemphasizing modesty gives others implicit permission to judge and measure a woman’s dedication to the gospel, or “worthiness,” based on physical appearance.

(3) Appearance sends a message about who they are, based on their culture, and that it has influence on others, but they are never responsible for another person’s thoughts, feelings, or behaviors."

I most certainly do not contend that modesty is an overrated asset; it is taught and practiced in my religion because it's important. I support that at Church-sponsored events, attendees are expected to adhere to a dress code that requires men and women to be neatly groomed and dressed to the preset standard, and to act in accordance with religious standards.

I do not believe, however, that clothing modesty should be a communal tool used to force the non-compliant to feel shame; I think it's a personal conviction that encompasses a pragmatic awareness of self and circumstance, and edifies feelings of comfort and competence in the company of others. Not everyone is taught the same things about what is modest to wear, but the standards for Church events have been made pretty clear and I believe everyone should be able to expect themselves and other attendees to follow those guidelines.

Outside of Church-sponsored events I'm chaperoning, though? It's not my job to tell my boys to change their ripped jeans to slacks or tell my girls to put on a longer skirt. That's their own prerogative out in the world, and it's up to their parents to school them in matters of dress.

Telling the Truth

Let's get personal for a moment. I was a virgin when I got married at nearly twenty-seven years of age. It was because of personal religious values. Am I proud of it? Yes, because I made a choice and I stuck to it. Do I think anyone who engages in premarital sex is, therefore, not as holy as me? No, not really. The agency was theirs to act upon, as it was for me. I just wish it could have been a better experience for a lot of my loved ones who did decide to have sex as teens.

People say that's kind of hypocritical; frankly, I think it's hypocritical that even when young couples newly wed in my religion get married, they have experiences just as poor because no one's bothered to teach them to have good sex.

It is true that abstinence is the only method that guarantees avoidance of STDs and unwanted pregnancies, but regardless of how you feel about it personally, it’s a costly mistake (financially, physically, and emotionally) to not teach your child how to use contraceptives to protect himself or herself if and when they choose to exercise their God-given free agency. I would rather my child experience a safe, enjoyable and consensual "first time" regardless of age or relationship status as opposed to a miserable and frightening and painful experience that leaves him or her struggling with an unwanted pregnancy of partner or self.

It is a parent's responsibility to educate and fully disclose to their children the facts concerning sex, reproduction, and the responsible use of contraceptives. Children should not be confused and misled with religious dogma, half-truths, and outright lies designed to keep them 'pure' and 'modest'. We should not be shaming them and shutting them down when their sexuality begins to develop and create new experiences in their life. We should provide them well-considered, age-based truth and facts and continue to keep supporting and informing them as they grow.

Children deserve truth. They're capable of handling it. Parents cannot expect to 'opt-out' of having important conversations and learning experiences with their child because it's complicated, difficult, uncomfortable, or painful. Among other things, parenthood is a responsibility. If more parents would stop taking their duty and authority for granted, maybe children would learn respect for it as well.

Because this False Belief in "White Privilege" When I've Been Turned Away From Government Programs Due to My Lack Of Non-Whiteness is, Frankly...Racist.

I think racism definitely exists individually, but perhaps due to the caliber of individual I tend to spend time with, I've met few of any "race". I can tell you, though, that discrimination means that if I do a Google search for student loans for any non-white ethnicity, I get a lot more results than the zero I get when I search for scholarships for "white" people. I guess I will be applying for a non-racist scholarship when I go back to school - the kind that are given to any individual regardless of skin color, and are awarded by virtue of worthiness based on attributes a person has personally achieved.

According to the most recent census, 63% of the US is "white", and my personal beliefs dictate that whether an individual is in the 37% or in the remainder, every person is equal, and how well they apply themselves should be the chief predictor of their success.

There is no lawful practice in the United States that keeps any of her citizens from striving (i.e., working hard or smart) to attain equal ground with or even excel beyond the reach of another "race". None of us should consider ourselves "victims" of our own skin color, and the wonderful thing about being in America is that if a person so much as suspects they are being victimized or discriminated against "based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin," they may seek legal redress. Other prohibited manners of discrimination are posted here. If federal or state or legal rights to access are going to be granted to anybody, then the same should be granted to all. A nation can't be equal if its people are not receiving or are being denied equal percentages of assistance, justice, and representation.

Again, I am perfectly aware that racism exists. And just like slavery, it's not limited to one or two skin colors. A racially-charged crime should be considered every bit as heinous as another of equal racially-motivated brutality regardless of the color of person against whom it is committed, and be labeled as a hate crime every bit as speedily.

The Worth of Mothers

There's an article I just read about a school in Connecticut that asks parents to share how their child was born on their kindergarten application - whether it was a vaginal delivery or delivery via C-section. This is, presumably, due to a myth about C-section children being less likely to succeed academically due to the traumatic nature of their birth (because being squeezed out of your mother's vagina is to be considered, I presume, somehow less traumatic).

Honestly, it bothered me. Even around supposedly enlightened and compassionate women, it seems there's a lot of judging that goes on. If you're not married by 22, something's wrong with you. If you don't have kids immediately after marriage, something's wrong with you. If you let your kid eat that Cheerio off the floor, something's wrong with you. It's like some other women need to find something bad about you...in order for her to feel good about being herself.

I was speaking to my gorgeously ready-to-pop friend and another new mother recently, and we were able to relate altogether too many nasty comments made by WOMEN who judge other women's worthiness for motherhood and the legitimacy of her offspring strictly by the manner in which she gave birth. According to this grading scale I'm hearing about, women who are able to deliver "naturally" deserve the highest praise and are the most deserving of motherhood. Those women whose deliveries involved any type of medication or medical interference are labeled contemptible failures who are pitied and reviled for having blemished their birthing experience with chemicals. C-sections are the considered the "easy way out" of experiencing "real birth" for the weak, lazy woman who can't be inconvenienced by the baby's timing or be bothered to "sweat it out". These women are the true pariahs.

I've even seen mothers who fall within the parameters for the last two categories, who have themselves been "mommy-shamed" for not going through the supposedly superior "natural" birthing method, go on to vehemently laud "natural" birthers while simultaneously disparaging or expressing condescension for those who shared their own experiences. It's sad that WOMEN in society are taking something beautiful and "natural" in every way, and turning it into a perverse competition for personal validity when really, isn't being a woman difficult enough and motherhood demanding enough without losing more sleep trying to keep score?

And remember, if you really are a worthy mother, you'll feed your children only organic food harvested from the unpolluted mountaintops of Peru by certified sacred virgins who bathe thrice in the holy pools every dawn, and you should never let your special little snowflake touch preservatives or hand sanitizer or they'll become intellectually retarded and emotionally stunted and your grandchildren will have webbed feet.

As told by the NIH: "The intelligence quotient of school aged children delivered by cesarean section and vaginal delivery"

A Tragically Current Human Condition I Wish These Confederate Flag Haters Would Take Up Arms Against as Ardently

Slavery is irrespective of nationality, color, creed, and time. It happens everywhere, and can happen to anyone. If a fraction as much effort was put into ending the slavery that exists today as is being put into decrying abuses that happened decades and centuries ago, the lives of up to an estimated 60,000 human beings currently suffering enslavement in the United States alone could change for the better. I feel for the oppressed, the violated, and the maltreated of any era, but the only power that any of us have to change lives, shape events, or make things better, lies exclusively in the present and in the future.

Slavery isn't over for everyone, but I'm glad it's over for a lot of people. I certainly consider myself fortunate to have never been enslaved, and find it a blessing that, of everyone I have met in my life regardless of nationality, color, or creed, not one has confided that they are or have ever been under that yoke of bondage, either.