​Memorial Day II – The gift of tears and laughter
 
Most of we humans are blessed with the gift of tears.   Allison Aubrey in an article entitled “Teary-Eyed Evolution: Crying Serves a Purpose” quotes Jesse Bering.    Jesse Bering directs the Institute of Cognition and Culture at Belfast University. “Bering says that those of our early ancestors who were most empathic probably thrived because it helped them build strong communities, which in turn gave them protection and support. Within these communities, Bering says, tears could be powerful tools. They did more than signal vulnerability –they were perhaps a way of keeping social and reproductive bonds strong Maybe good criers were survivors.”
 
Some of us cry when we are happy.  Some of us cry when we feel a sense of relief. Some of us cry when we get fearful or sad.  Crying can signal empathic closeness, the loss of closeness or the fear of the loss of closeness.   Crying may also signal the relief of being safe following a period of danger or the fact that we do not feel safe.  Tears can, of course, also be used to feign an emotion in the hope of eliciting pity or some other emotional response from another person. 
 
Although scientists argue about the evolutionary purpose of tears, most tears, unless they are being purposely shed to manipulate, seem to be related to a sense of kinship with another person or group of people. This is certainly what Jesse Bering is suggesting. It is a symptom of empathy – of  identifying with another person or persons.
 
Tears may be external and, thus, shared openly with others or they may be entirely internal.   In some cultures, particularly in the United States, external sharing of tears is often seen by males as a feminine quality - the opposite of the John Wayne – and the male Marine concept of masculinity which often insures that males keep a distance from other males and from females.  It has been my experience with myself and other humans that we cannot hide our true feelings and physically touch another person.   I suppose we may maintain our false sense of stoicism, but that is not easy.  Most of us, if we want to hide our emotions will use a distancing technique such as physical distance and/or a distancing behavior such as anger.
 
It is also my experience that those of we humans who are free with our tears are also free with our laughter.  It seems to be that all of my emotions reside in one location in my body. When I hide one emotion I hide them all.  When I share one emotion I am unable to keep myself from sharing others. I personally do not think of anger as an emotion, but rather a device for blocking the sharing of emotions.  Another way of referring to anger is as a secondary emotion which hides primary emotions.
 
When we are fully present emotionally first to ourselves and then to others we will, I believe, find it very difficult to deny the fact that we are all part of one human community.  We are all connected and interdependent.
 
Many experts have posited that what distinguishes words from creative writing, notes from music, rote movement from dance, forced brush strokes from painting, shaping clay or some other material from allowing a creation to emerge from the material one is using is the extent to which the artist is willing to risk sharing his/her own emotional and spiritual nakedness.    As a psychotherapist I have often worked for/with those creators who are experiencing a “block.”   In my experience that block is always related to the conscious or unconscious fear of revealing another level of emotional nakedness.
 
There are those of us who are were so practiced at hiding our emotions from ourselves and others that we needed some guidance in opening that locked, steel door.  For me, that meant hiring a movement therapist who guided me in non-verbally expressing emotions through movement.  During that time, I was not allowed to use verbal language because I was very adept at using language to hide my emotions.   The therapist would work with me for hours directing me to “fake” or to pretend expressing fear, sadness, joy, sorrow or some other emotion.  Then he would have me enlarge my expression until the tension between the door and the emotion was so great that the emotion would burst forth.    This was hard work and uncomfortable, but I knew that I could only be born – that I could only exist -  if I owned my emotions. Once we own our emotions we can be in community. To empathize is to be in community.
 
All of us will have our own level of sharing and our own style of sharing. With some of us the sharing is very open and, for many, much too naked.  We cannot be otherwise. For others the sharing is like a gentle zephyr.   If we are present to each other the style will not matter. We will sense the emotional presence of another no matter what their style.
 
If we want to create a more loving, peaceful and just world we will have to learn to  honor –even to celebrate – our laughter, our tears and other emotions.  We will allow ourselves to be truly empathic – to honor our interconnectedness.  
 
 
Written May 30, 2016

​Gathering – The quick and the dead
 
Although many associate this phase the quick and the dead with a movie by that name, it is familiar to those Christians or Christian scholars as a phase found in both the Nicence Creed and the Book of Common Prayer.   In this context it refers to the time when Christians believe Christ will come to judge the quick (living) and the dead. 
 
On this Memorial Day for those of us who are more mature, the phrase might also remind us of  long past Memorial Days when families would gather at the cemetery where a number of other family members were buried. The purpose of the gathering was to:
·     Clean the graves of one’s ancestors  - deceased loved ones (and perhaps a few who were more lovable in death than they were in life).
·     Honor the memory of those same people with flowers and/or grave blankets which had been carefully constructed for weeks prior to Memorial Day.
·     Share a meal of fried chicken, potato salad and whatever vegetables might have been available and which did not require any preparation at the cemetery.  I do not recall anyone bringing a grill to cook food there.
·     Share stories with and about one’s life since the last family gathering with each other as well as stories of times with one’s ancestors.
 
As far as I know these family Memorial Day gatherings no longer occur.  Two of my sisters recently let me know that they had been to the cemetery to clear the graves of some of our ancestors and to add our recently deceased mother’s ashes  to those already there.  Our mother had made that request. She also requested that there be no service or other ritual either at the funeral home or at the cemetery.  Since those two sisters are the only two of the five children of our mother to live near the cemetery they have dutifully and without complaint assumed the responsibility  for our ancestors welcome newly resting family members for many years.   They also clean the cemeteries. I do not think that they now linger and visit  over food.    I need to also add they take care of the quick as they took care of our mother until she recently died.
 
We humans have  apparently been honoring our ancestors and the gifts they have given us for a very long time.   I personally know that I owe many of my interests, talents, and life lessons the dead buried in that cemetery and those connected to those buried there.
 
As I think of some of those gifts I am particularly aware of the following:
 
·     My love of reading, music and learning  from my Grandmother Pickett.
·     My love of the blessings of the earth and ancestors from all  the Holman family – Aunt Josie, Uncle Johnny  and many others.
·     My love  of creativity or exploration from my father.
·     The courage to reinvent oneself from my mother and some of my paternal and maternal aunts.
·     The courage to love unconditionally from my Uncle Harold and Aunt Pleasie.
·     A certain swagger as well as a humility to start over from my Grandfather Pickett.
·     A love of dance, music and creative energy from my father
·     That women could be powerful and the jobs of husbands could be secondary to the professional careers of women.
·     That God had a sense of humor.
 
 
These are just those gifts which immediately come to mind.   Of course, most of us also learned from our ancestors what did not work so well. We may have learned the potency of the hurt which words can cause, the energy which is stolen by hanging on to resentments, the terrible toll of forgetting to nurture relationships, and the fallacy of being able to run from one’s demons.  
 
I also learned that despite dire predictions and potentially catastrophic results that we humans could, as a species, survive wars, the election of very challenged politicians, and natural disasters.  I learned firsthand that energy is never created or destroyed but lives on in each new generation.   I learned humility is not only possible but necessary and that we may be more than the sins which seems to be so prominently noted by the leaders of certain religious groups. 
 
I am not suggesting that all lessons were learned and practiced by the time I legally became an adult.  Many of those lessons were tucked away in the recesses of my cells until called into service or sometimes dragged into service following long awaited realization that attempting the same thing over and over with the same negative results might indeed be a sign of insanity.
 
One of these days I will make the transition from the quick to the dead.  Perhaps memorial day is a good day to think about what gifts I will leave my son, nieces, nephews and others whose lives I touch.
 
Perhaps the judgment of the quick and the dead takes place daily rather than being a future event. Perhaps  in this day of virtual reality we can all gather with the quick and the dead on this Memorial Day. Perhaps we can gather with humility and much gratitude.
 
Written May 28th, 2016

​Compensation vs problem solving – sexual abuse – empathy

For the past few days I have been exploring the concept of empathy as an action verb – something we do rather than something we just feel.  This morning I want to begin to explore the subject the history of sexual abuse within the church, particularly the Roman Catholic Church as well as in the culture overall. When I think of sexual abuse I believe we need to consider the following:

•    The intensely personal nature of sexual contact.
•    The fact that we human often engage in sexual behavior without being emotionally present.
•    The use of power to take advantage of the vulnerability of a child or another adult.
•    The fact that we in the United States seem to sometimes focus on victimhood rather than problem solving.
•    The fact that we in the United States have become a very litigious society.
•    The belief that awarding large sums of money to the victims is the best way to give victims a sense of justice – of those responsible being punished.
•    The fact that historically many have blamed the victim for being victimized.
•    The fact that in the case of the desire to abuse or the actual abuse of children we in the United States have made it nearly impossible for someone to safely ask for and received help.
•    Punishment does not heal.
•    Laws frequently arise only after a person, community, institution or company has failed to take action.
•    The focus has been on the sexual abuse of children, particularly male children by male priests or other clergy.  As far as I can have determined churches, particularly the Roman Catholic Church, has not publicly talked much about the fact that male priests often have adult heterosexual and homosexual romantic liaisons, a number of which have been emotionally and sometimes physically abusive.
•    Often the very persons or institutions which are the most vocal about denouncing any sexual activity outside the institution of a heterosexual marriage are those who violate these teachings.
•    The accusation or charge of sexual harassment is another aspect of this topic which I will not be addressing in this article but which deserves to be addressed.

Because I have and continue to work as a counselor with both those who been sexually abused and those who sexually abuse others, including children, as well as those who are accused and convicted of one of the multitudes of behavior which can now land one on the very public sexual offenders register, I am acutely aware of the pain of all those affected.    The movement in this country has been to punish those who may be a danger to others and those whose behavior we, as community, although not dangerous,  do not approve of.

I personally think that the approach has been ineffective, unkind and even damaging to all the individuals involved.   I would like to suggest that he current approaches are intended to give the appearance of strong and direct action being taken to stop or reduce sexual violence, but are actually creating more victims without decreasing the instances of emotional or physical sexual violence.

Let me be very clear about certain facts:
•    Sexual abuse of anyone is not acceptable
•    A significant number of children have been sexually abused.
•    Sexual abuse in the military and other work environments occurs very frequently.  
•    Those who have been sexually abused need to be compensated for lost wages if they have to take time off work or interrupt their career as a direct result of sexual abuse.  Any treatment for physical or emotional damage needs to be paid for by the abuser or the organization for which the abuser works.  
•    If a parent of a children who has been abused loses work time or needs counseling those costs need to be fully covered.

At the same time, I believe that we need, as a community to address the following:

•    Sexual abuse or any other abuse may leave lifetime scars, but telling children or adults that their trauma makes them lifetime victims incapable of having a full, meaningful life is doing them a lifetime disservice.
•    In 99 % of the cases, we need to eliminate the goal of insuring the wealth of those attorneys specializing in getting rich off of sexual abuse cases.   If the law is clear that actual costs of treatment, missed work or lost career opportunities will be compensated there will not, in most cases, be any need for attorneys.
•    Most of those who sexually abused others, including children, are not pedophiles. 
•    We, as a society, and church officials need to come to terms with the fact that most of we humans are very sexual beings.
•    Sexual contact may be about control, the need for physical closeness, or about the impulsive need for sexual release because he or she has believed that they had to be sexually abstinent from sexual activity with themselves and others.
•    Teenage children can and are often very sexual and very seductive.  We need to teach them how to deal with those feelings/urges.  Cold shower and sports may not be the entire answer.
•    Criminalization of sex workers or the people who employ them has not worked.
•    Provocative clothes do not cause someone to be a sexual abused.  On the other hand, they may play a role in stimulating sexual desire.
•    False accusations of child sexual abuse in a contentious divorce is, I believe very common.  Even experts who are trained to ferret out the truth often are fooled by the fact that children are coached to lie. (Based on my limited experience and the many reports I have read.)
•    Criminalization of having child pornography on one’s computer makes no sense.  
o    It has not been established whether the majority of people who watch child porn abuse children sexually.
o    It is very difficult at this time to determine how the child porn got on a computer. It can be downloaded by someone else to a distant computer.
o    Pornography, including child pornography is big business. It is difficult for me to believe that only a few people in our culture are spending billions of dollars on pornography. We may not approve but it is not going away. Pornography as been a part of culture for as long as we humans have been recording and sharing pictures.


For today, it is also my understanding that true pedophiles may not be treatable via talk therapy. The percentage of true pedophiles is, I believe,  very small.   They may need to be treated chemically and closely monitored as people with a chronic condition.  They should not be punished.  No one wakes up one day and decides to have an uncontrollable, compulsive desire to sexually abuse a prepubescent child.  No one!

If we were less punishment oriented, then when someone has problems with inappropriate sexual desires or behavior they could ask for and get help.

Religious institutions need to come to terms with the fact that clergy and lay people need to know that they have healthy, non-abusive, options for addressing and dealing with sexual desires and with related behaviors such as the need to control.  In it not acceptable, in my opinion, for the church to agree to just turn over abusers to legal authorities.    Just as organized religion has often harbored immigrants, anti-war protestors and other social and political activists, representatives of those institutions needs to be clear that:
•    They are not going to participate in a system which focuses on punishment rather than empathic help.
•    The Christian church as well as many other religions is grounded in the teaching that “there but for the Grace of God go I”.  This is a key component of empathy.  
•    Empathy does not deny issues.  Empathy offers supportive, non-judgmental help.

As I have previously mentioned, the larger society, including religious institutions, could learn a lot from the 12-step recovery programs.  They believe and practice accountability, forgiveness, and learning new skills for living.  Many times I have attended an open speaker meeting where people I know talk about the horrendous ways they hurt themselves and others, including sexually, and why they can now move on with their lives and not repeat that behavior.   If I want empathy along with accountability I am more likely to find it in a 12 step meeting than I will in most churches.  It is possible to have both.

Written May 27, 2016




 

​Memorial Day  USA  - The mathematics of empathy

I was surprised to hear from my adopted twelve-year old nephew Paul the day after I had an unexpected and delightful visit with his six-year old sister Sam.  Paul has this social studies teacher who challenges his students with assignments that they get excited about and which frequently involves help from extended family. Learning that Paul had an assignment for memorial day weekend just a week before the last day of school did not surprise me.   Paul called early this morning and asked if he could come over after school.  He had already checked with his parents to make sure it was okay with them.  The family is leaving tomorrow for a visit to his dad’s parents.

Since he was coming right after school I knew he would need a “snack” more substantial than cookies.    Paul is particularly fond of grilled cheese sandwiches with bacon made with Uncle Jim’s homemade rye bread.  Fortunately it is okay with him that I use pre-cooked bacon and the Gorge Foreman Grill.   I had everything all ready to go when I heard a light knock at the kitchen door followed by the door opening.

Me:  Hi Paul.  How was school? Hungry?

Paul: (Gives me a hug and a kiss.) It was  okay but even the teachers seem eager for the summer to begin.  Except, of course, for Mr. Holcomb. 

Me:  I thought I would make grilled cheese with bacon on rye. Okay!

Paul:  Yes, please. I am really hungry Uncle Jim.   

Me: Great.  Why don’t you pour your mik. The grill does not take long.   Do you have your assignment?

Paul:  Here it is Uncle Jim.

Paul assignment:   “Memorial Day – The mathematics of empathy.  In a war each side thinks that they are right. Each inflicts harm and suffers much hard.  After a war there is a struggle for those involved or the countries involved to hold on to the belief that the lives of their friends and family members were not in vain. At the same time, if further wars are to be avoided each side has to believe that both or all countries were equally right or wrong and that it is okay to forgive, trust again and move on.   If you were President of the United States this memorial day what brief speech would you most want to give to the people of Japan and the United States. You can either write a brief speech or list the points you would make in bullet form. In mathematical terms two plus two has to equal four meaning you have to balance the pain and the consequent needs of the veterans and their families in your country with the pain and consequent needs of the veterans and their families in Japan.”

Me: Wow!  I do like Mr. Holcomb.  He certainly challenges his student (and their families) to think.

Here. Your sandwich is ready.

Paul:  Thanks Uncle Jim

Me:  Let’s use the board.  How about X represents the pain and consequent needs of  veterans and their families in the Japan and Y represents the pain and consequent needs of  veterans and their families in the USA.   We need for:

        X = Y

If both  X and Y = 2 then:

        2 = 2

What do you think are the pain and consequent needs  of X and Y Paul?

Paul:  Japan needs to believe that they did a good thing when they killed  people and attacked the ship in Pearl Harbor?

Me:  How could they think killing people was a good thing.

Paul:  Because they believed that to provide a good life for Japanese people that they needed to control more countries?  Japan, Italy and Germany formed …   Now I cannot remember Uncle Jim

Me: The Axis?

Paul:  That is it Uncle Jim.  Mr. Holcomb says that if we really want to understand WW II we would have to look at history long before WW III. He says that  sometimes it seems as if we act as if events just occur out of nothing.

Me:   That is very good Paul.   As you get older you might want to read the three volume Testament of Youth  by Vera Brittain as well as some other books which look at the history leading up to WWII. There are a lot of thoughts and opinions which we in the USA generally do not study in K-12 grades.

Paul:  How do we do this assignment without reading a lot of books now Uncle Jim? I cannot read a bunch of books before Tuesday.

Me: That is true. Perhaps for now it is enough to know that countries have been taking over other countries or territories for a long time. The United States did not, for example, begin as the 50 states we now are did it.

Paul: No. Sometimes we bought areas which became states or territories or we fought other people.

Me: That is right Paul.  I suppose we should get back to the assignment.  So:

•    X thought that they were helping the Japanese people long term.

What did Y, the USA, think Paul.

Paul:  The thought:

•    We were defending ourselves after an attack at Pearl Harbor. 

Me: Had there been a lot of pressure from England and other countries for the United States to get involved in the war Paul?

Paul:  Didn’t Mr. Churchill spend a lot of time at the White House Uncle Jim?

Me: Yes he did.  Do you know what  Mrs. Roosevelt worried about when Mr. Churchill visited.

Paul: We talked about that.  She worried that her husband, the president, would drink as much as Mr. Churchill.

Me: That is right.  So another reason we got into the war was:

•    To help our friends fight the Germans.

Ignoring a lot of other important events what was the final outcome Paul.

Paul:

•    A lot of Y’s (the USA’s) soldiers died in the war.  
•    People in the USA had to give up a lot to make sure that there was money and supplies for the war. It was called rat…l    Oh, what was it called, Uncle Jim.

Me: Rationing meaning that you could only buy so much of certain good or sometimes a lot of things were not availabe.   Even food was rationed. Even before the atomic bomb the Japanese people lost a lot?    There are many different figures for how many each country lost in WW II. Some estimated that the United States lost over 131 million and Japan lost 71 million plus places such as Korea which was a colony of Japan lost a lot.    Over 5 millions Jewish people were killed in the death camps.   All the countries involved lost of a lot of people. Every lost represented a family member and, thus, affected others.  How do we measure the losses Paul? The atomic bomb killed an estimated 225,000.  Did dropping the bombs save more lives than it took.

Paul:  It is really difficult to imagine those numbers.  So, Uncle Jim, does X ever equal Y?  Do they ever come out even Uncle Jim?

Me:  I do not think the number killed tells the whole story especially when we think that every death affected many people for many years.   We also have to think about the fact that once one country used the bomb it started another chain of events.    

Paul:  How do we assign a number to each of the issues we have discussed Uncle Jim?

Me:  I have no idea.  It seems we would have to say that each side suffered loss and consequent pain of 2 to the infinite power. There is no way to measure that is there Paul.

Paul:  It does not seem like it Uncle Jim.
So if both X and Y had infinite pain and subsequent need to the infinite power, are they equal?

Me:  Let’s for now assume that might be true. If that is accurate what should we focus on in the speech Paul?

Paul:  That no one wins in war and no one wins  when one person or country thinks that they are more important than another?

Me:  So it sounds as if the only way to make the equation equal is to honor the great pain everyone suffers. Perhaps it is also important that we not  forget that everyone is equally sacred and that we need to work hard to make sure everyone is treated as we want to be treated.  What do you think Paul?

Paul:  That makes sense Uncle Jim.  You, me, Sam, mom and dad all are treated the same. Sam and I argue some times but we love each other.  Are you saying a country or a group of countries is like a big family Uncle Jim.

Me:  I guess I am Paul. Does this mean your speech is going to be very short Paul?

Paul:  I guess. It will be like a Japanese poem, the Hi…  The hi..?

Me: The Haiku?

Paul:  Yes.

Me:  Ahh.  So your speech will have 3 lines with the first and last line having 5 moras and the middle lime having 7.   Let’s see:

We are all petals.

Paul: That is 5 syllables.  Now we need a line of 7.

Each meeting in the center.

Me: Very good Paul.  Now for the last line.

Tethered but growing.

Paul.  That is like our family Uncle Jim  We share a home base but we have to grow beyond it.

Me:  Outstanding Paul. You are so bright.  I am so proud of you.  So here is your speech:

We are all petals
Each meeting in the center.
Tethered but growing.

Paul:  Thanks Uncle Jim.

Me:  You are welcome Paul. This was fun.

Written May 26, 2016.





 

​Sam asks about criminals and learns about empathy
 
The end of the school year is always a busy time for the kids, parents and teachers.   There are tests, school-related performances,  discussions, decisions to make about school in the fall, field trips and time with friends who are going to spend the summer with the non-custodial parent.    My adopted niece and nephew, six-year-old Sam and twelve-year-old Paul have not spent much time at my house in the past few weeks.  Neither had needed my help with homework and they were too busy to wonder about issues which their parents thought were best addressed by Uncle Jim.   Receiving a call from Sam after school asking if she could come over was a pleasant surprise.   Fortunately, we had anticipated this busy time of year and stowed away dozens of chocolate chip cookies in the freezer.  Sam, Paul and I like them best when frozen and dunked in out hot chocolate or cold milk.  Tonight it is still pretty warm and I have guessed that Sam will want chocolate milk.  
 
I hear a light knock on the door and then the door opens.
 
Me:   Hi Sam.  How are you? How was school today?
 
Sam:  Hi Uncle Jim (she gives me a hug and a kiss.).  School was fine.  We went to the museum and then we had a picnic lunch by the water.  
 
Me: That sounds like fun.   I love the museum.   What did you like best?
 
Sam:  I like the stone and metal people in the yard.
 
Me: Oh, I love the sculpture garden too.  Do you have a favorite?
 
I like the ones which are round and smooth. They look happy.
 
Me:  That must be the Henry Moore sculptures.  Here let me get some photos of them on the laptop.  Ahh…  Here they are.  Are these similar to the ones you like?
 
Sam:  Yes. I love those Uncle Jim.  Henry Maa…
 
Me:  Henry Moore.
 
Sam:  Uncle Jim, Susie’s mom is going to jail.   Dustin said she is a criminal.  Susie said that her mother is not like other criminals. She just got caught with being inside or something and is only a white something.
 
Me:  A white-collar criminal.  Yes, I read about that.  She helps people invest their money and was  accused of insider trading.
 
Sam:  What is insider trading Uncle Jim?  How is it different from outsider trading?
 
Me: Well, some companies sell portions of their business to other people.  The parts they buy are called stocks.  Here let me put this on the blackboard.   This circle is the company that makes potato chips.  The green dots are all the people who buy a part of the business in hopes that they will sell a lot of potato chips. If they sell a lot of chips  then the company makes money and the people who bought parts or shares in the company make money. Let’s say that the people running the company decide to sell the company for a really high price.   This bigger circle is the company which is going to buy this smaller circle. One of the people who runs the company tells someone like Susie’s mother who then buys a lot of the stock. Only the people who run the company and Susie’s mother knew that the stock was going to be sold and then worth a lot more money.  Because Susie’s mother had information no one else had she made a lot more money than the other people who did not know the secret.  
 
Sam:  This is confusing Uncle Jim.
 
Me: Yes.  Let’s use another example.  Let’s say that one of the kids saw a copy of a test everyone in your class was going to take.  She gives you a copy of the test and then both of you do really well on a very difficult test.  You and the other person got an 100% and everyone else does very poorly.  That would be cheating  and would hurt everyone.  If the teacher found out she would say that you and other person had inside information.
 
Sam: Well, that makes sense.  I would not cheat Uncle Jim.
 
Me:  Well I know that Sam, that but it would be easy to be tempted to cheat if you had not studied and  you knew you were going to fail the test.
 
Sam:  I feel bad when I get a bad grade.
 
Me:  I know.  But you know some nights you want to do something besides homework and you still want to get a good grade.  It would be easier to cheat.
 
Sam: I know. When grandma was visiting I still had to study.  Still, I would get in a lot of trouble if I cheated.
 
Me:  Yes, it would not be the right thing to do. 
 
Sam:  You are saying that Susie’s mother cheated and now is going to jail Uncle Jim?
 
Me:  Yes. She is a good person but gave in to the temptation to make some extra money quickly.
 
Sam: If she is going to jail she is still a criminal even though Susie said she was not like other criminals.
 
Me:  Yes. Dustin was right but it was not kind of him to say what he said.   Whether we cheat one way or another we are all the same.   Robbers are people who cheat. Instead of working to earn money they take  the money someone else has earned.
Sam:  You are saying that Susie’s mom is the same as the person who robs.
 
Me:  Yes. Even though we sometimes call the person who does something like insider trading a white-collar criminal, that hides the fact that what Susie’s mom did was basically to rob people in a different way.
 
Sam:  But Susie’s mom always makes cookies when there is something special at school and invites me to swim in their pool. She is really nice. She cannot be like the robber who is not a nice person.
 
Me:  Oh!  How many robbers do you know Sam?
 
Sam: None, but on the television you can tell that they are bad people. They are not like Susie’s mother.
 
Me:  If someone did not know you but knew you lied or cheated even one time they might think that you are just a liar or a cheater.
 
Sam:  Now I am really confused Uncle Jim.
 
Me:  We all can do some bad things. Sometimes some people get caught and go to jail. Then we may think that people in jail are just bad people.   Dustin may think that all people who go to jail  are bad. Susie may be be saying her mother is not like the other people in jail  - that her mother is not a real criminal. What if we knew all the people in jail as well as we knew Susie’s mother?
 
Sam:  Then it would be really difficult to know who is good and who is bad Uncle Jim.
 
Me:  Yes, it seems as if calling someone a name such as a criminal does not allow us to get to know them.  We can all be kind and unkind.  We all make mistakes. 
 
Sam: Can I go with Susie to see her mother? Would that be okay? Maybe we could make her cookies.
 
Me: That is really sweet Sam.  Let’s give them a little time  and then I will call Susie’s dad to see if that would be okay.  We can also call the jail to find out if we are allowed to bring cookies. We may also be allowed to write to Susie’s mom.  
 
Sam:  Thanks Uncle Jim.  Can I tell Dustin to just shut up and not talk about Susie’s mom?
 
Me: Well.  (hiding a smile.) If we treat Dustin mean that would be just like Dustin talking mean about Susie’s mom .
 
Sam:  Oh!  I did not think of that.  I have to be nice to Dustin too?
 
Me:  It is really easy to understand how we can judge someone based on one behavior.   Dustin judges Susie’s mom. We judge Dustin.
 
Sam:  I did not think of that Uncle Jim.
 
Me:  I know.   Oh dear, look at the time. It is nearly your bedtime. Finish you milk and I will walk you home.  I really enjoyed our visit.
 
Sam: Me too Uncle Jim (yawns).  Remember when you would carry me home.
 
Me: Yes. Now you are big.
 
Sam: Too big to carry home?
 
Me: No. Would you like me to carry you home?
 
Sam:  Yes, please. Just this once Uncle Jim.
 
Written May 25, 2016

​ The Power of our story


I first heard the report of the United States drone attack in Pakistan killing Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Mansour on Sunday when listening to the radio while driving to Gainesville for the Women in Blues Festival finale.  Of course, I am very aware that we:
        The United States feel  entitled to enter the airspaces of other countries such as Pakistan.  
Use drones to conduct violent missions.
     Are convinced that we are justified in killing those we have determined are the enemy.
     Can report such accomplishments without any apparent need to grieve the death of a human being.
The announcer on the radio who brought this news to me and all the other listeners heard his voice deliver the news without any apparent emotion or regret.  One might think that at this point in my history of having heard and read many such unemotional reports I  would not feel any kinship with Mr. Mansour.  Yet, I felt something which seemed very much like profound grief.  I think I was feeling grief for:
     The violent death of this man, Mullah Mohammad Mansour,  who was the son of his parents, and, I suspect, related to a great many other people.  I too am a son, a father, a sibling, a cousin, a nephew, a friend, a student, and a neighbor.
     The fact that I am a citizen of a country which condones not only the violent killing of others but the use such devices as drones which allows us greater emotional distance than a face-to-face killing. Distance makes it easier to think of the person or persons one is killing as objects.
     The arrogance which allow us to determine that it is our right to enter another country in person or via impersonal means such as armed drones to kill.
 
Representatives of we, the citizens of the United States, have determined that we have the right to name someone as the enemy thus pushing aside his (or her) humanness or name something as a drone and infuse it with the power to kill. “The Drone killed.  I did not kill another human being.” We also have the right, in the name of peace, to enter another country and kill “the enemy.”
 
Of course, I have long known that we humans have always used impersonal labels to dehumanize those we want to justify killing, put down, or otherwise harm– krauts , Japs, kooks, commies, “ni—ers,” enemy, insurgent, terrorist, woman, faggot, etc.   I am not sure when we humans first posited that  we could convince ourselves that we could sever the chord which connects us to all other life forms.  Many so called primitive tribes knew that animals have a spirit and that the spirit of animals and the humans involved had a relationship. Thus, if one killed an animal one needed to give thanks to the spirit of the animal. 
 
Susan Silverman, the author, talks about the moment in therapy when the death of her nine-month-old brother was named as a loss.  The mere fact of naming it relieved her anxiety about loss enough to allow her to begin to sleep. She had thought that because she was so young when he died that his death could not have been connected to her profound anxiety about loved ones leaving. The therapist made her brother live before he died.
 
 The writer and activist Eve Ensler who is most famous for her play The Vagina Monologues says:
 
“I believe in the power and mystery of naming things. Language has the capacity to transform our cells, rearrange our learned patterns of behavior and redirect our thinking. I believe in naming what's right in front of us because that is often what is most invisible.”
 
In the New Testament as used by the Christian Church,  the apostle John tells us:
 
“1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.”
 
Professsor Loren Graham in an article entitled The Power of names:  In Culture and in Mathematics, posits:
“A common concept in history is that knowing the name of something or someone gives one power over that thing or person. This concept occurs in many different forms in numerous cultures—ancient and primitive tribes, Islam, and Judaism; and in Egyptian, Vedic, Hindu, and Christian traditions. Some writers find it embedded in the first verses of Genesis, written probably more than three thousand years ago; others believe it to be an intrinsic characteristic of classical Greek religion; still others find it a central feature in magic and folklore, and modern feminist writers often see it as the rea son a woman is traditionally asked to take the name of her new husband.”
Any student of cultures knows that it has been a common practice for male leaders to determine that women are property and, therefore, subject to the rule of males. 
Once we name something or someone we can then attach it to an existing story we have learned or create a new story which validates the associations we already have with the name. If we already know the story of an individual there is no reason to try to get to know who that person is.   Many have written about their experience of meeting someone formerly labeled as an enemy  - that ni—er, that Jew, that Palestinian, that Muslim, that Christian, that criminal, that terrorist, that Jap, that woman, that faggot, that … - and then  sitting down with them as Mary, Martha, John, Sid, Addel, and listening to the story of that person.   They begin to exist as a person with their own story.
Andrew Stanton, filmmaker says that Fred Rogers of Mr. Rogers neighborhood carried in his wallet a quote from a social worker that said, “Frankly, there is not anyone you could not love once you have heard their story.”
Mr. Stanton in a Ted Talk, March 2012 The clues to a great story states:
“And the way I like to interpret that is probably the greatest story commandment, which is "Make me care" -- please, emotionally, intellectually, aesthetically, just make me care.”
 
Mr. Stanton goes on to say there are several characteristics of a story well told.   Let me paraphrase them here, but I hope the reader will take the time to listen to Andrew Stanton’s Ted Talk.  They are in my words:
 
     The story makes a promise that his story will heard somewhere.
     Makes the audience put things together – not what they already thought.
     The character or chief character – in this case the storyteller has a spine – something that drives that person.
     Makes the listener want to know what happens next and how it will end or conclude.
     Has a theme.
     Invokes wonder
 
In has been said that we are our story.  If we think we already know our story or the story of another person there is no us because it is not your story but the story I am imposing on you.  As soon as I label or name something or someone I have often decided I know all there is to know of their or its story. Empathy with the real person – the real story – is now impossible because the label or name tells me everything I need to know.   
The United States often tells itself – we tell ourselves, “We are American. We are peaceful. We know best. Our needs are more important. Without us to name you there is no you. You do not have a story.  You have no promise, no story to put together, no spine, no surprise, no them and no wonder.  We are America – not one of the American states – but we are America.”
 
If Mullah Mohammad Mansour is merely a bad person, a terrorist it is easy to kill him.  If someone is a criminal  they do not have a story. I know all I need to know.  If someone is a republican, a democrat, an independent I need know no more.  
 
Without a story there can be no you or me.  Without a story there can be no empathy. With empathy there can be no tribe.  
 
I will tell you who I am.  There is a huge difference between you labeling  someone as a “woman” and she labeling herself as, “I AM A WOMAN.”
 
Written May 24, 2016
 
 
 
From: Jimmy Pickett [mailto:pickettjf@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 4:45 PM
To: Becky and Bob Johnen
Subject: blog draft
 
Empathy, naming  and  story
 
I first heard the report of the United States drone attack in Pakistan killing of Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Mansour on Sunday when listening to the radio while driving to Gainesville for the Women in Blues Festival finale.  Of course, I am very aware that:
     We, the United States, feels  entitled to enter the airspaces of other countries such as Pakistan.
     Use drones to conduct violent missions.
     Are convinced that we are justified in killing those we have determined are the enemy.
     Can report such accomplishments without any apparent need to grieve the death of a human being.
The announcer on the radio who brought his news to me and all the other listeners to his voice delivered the news without any apparent emotion or regret.  One might think that at this point in my history of having heard and read many such unemotional reports I  would not feel any kinship with Mr. Mansour.  Yet, I felt something which seemed very much like profound grief.  I think I was feeling grief for:
     The violent death of this man, Mullah Mohammad Mansour,  who was the son of his parents, and, I suspect, related to a great many other people.  I too am a son, a father, a sibling, a cousin, a nephew, a friend, a student, and a neighbor.
     The fact that I am a citizen of a country which condones not only the violent killing of others but the use such devices as drones which allows us greater emotional distance than a face-to-face killing. Distance makes it easier to think of the person or persons one is killing as objects
     The arrogance which allow us to determine that it is our right to enter another country in person or via impersonal means such as armed drones to kill.
 
Representatives of we, the citizens of the United States, have determined that we have the right to name someone as the enemy thus pushing aside his (or her) humanness. name something as a drone and infuse it with the power to kill. “The Drone killed.  I did not kill another human being.” We also have the right, in the name of peace, to enter another country and kill “the enemy”.
 
Of course, I have long known that we humans have always used impersonal labels to dehumanize the those we want to justify killing  or otherwise harm– krauts , Japs, kooks, commies, “ni—ers”, enemy, insurgent, terrorist, woman, faggot, etc.   I am not sure when we humans first posited that  we could convince ourselves that we could sever the chord which connects us to all other life forms.  Many so called primitive tribes knew that animals have a spirit and that the spirit of animals and the humans involved had a relationship. Thus, if one killed an animal one needed to give thanks to the spirit of the animal. .
 
Susan Silverman, the author, talks about the moment in therapy when the death of her 9 month old brother was named as a loss.  The mere fact of naming it relieved her anxiety about loss enough to allow her to begin to sleep. She had thought that because she was so young when he died that his death could not have been connected to her profound anxiety about loved ones leaving. The therapist made her brother live before he died.
 
 The writer and activist Eve Ensler who is most famous for her play The Vagina Monologues says:
 
I believe in the power and mystery of naming things. Language has the capacity to transform our cells, rearrange our learned patterns of behavior and redirect our thinking. I believe in naming what's right in front of us because that is often what is most invisible.
 
In the New Testament as used by the Christian Church,  the apostle John tells us:
 
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.
 
Professsor Loren Graham in an article entitled The Power of names:  In Culture and in Mathematics, posits:
“A common concept in history is that knowing the name of something or someone gives one power over that thing or person. This concept occurs in many different forms in numer- ous cultures—ancient and primitive tribes, Islam, and Judaism; and in Egyptian, Vedic, Hindu, and Christian traditions. Some writers find it embedded in the first verses of Genesis, written probably more than three thousand years ago; others believe it to be an intrinsic characteristic of classical Greek religion; still others find it a central feature in magic and folklore, and modern feminist writers often see it as the rea son a woman is traditionally asked to take the name of her new husband.”
Any student of cultures knows that it has been a common practice for male leaders to determine that women are property  are, therefore, subject to the rule of males. 
One we name something or someone we can then attach it to an existing story we have learned or create a new story which validates the associations we already have with the name. If we already know the story of an individual there is no reason to try to get to know who that person is.   Many have written about their experience of meeting someone formerly labeled as an enemy  - that ni—er, that Jew, that Palestinian, that Muslim, that Christian, that Criminal, that terrorist, that Jap, that woman, that faggot, that … - and then  sitting down with them as Mary, Martha, John, Sid, Addel, and listening to the story of that person.   They begin to exist as a person with their own story.
Andrew Stanton, filmmaker says that Fred Rogers of Mr. Rogers neighborhood carried in his wallet a quote from a social worker that said, “Frankly, there is not anyone you could not love once you have heard their story.”
Mr. Stanton in a Ted Talk, March 2012 The Clues to a great story states:
And the way I like to interpret that is probably the greatest story commandment, which is "Make me care" -- please, emotionally, intellectually, aesthetically, just make me care.”
 
Mr. Stanton goes on to say there are several characteristics of a story well told.   Let me paraphrase them here, but I hope the reader will take the time to listen to Andrew Stanton’s Ted Talk.  They are in my words:
 
     The story makes a promise that his story will head somewhere.
     Makes the audience put things together – not what they already thought.
     The character or chief character – in this case the storyteller has a spine – something that drives that person.
     Makes the listener want to know what happens next and how it will end or conclude.
     Has a theme.
     Invokes wonder
 
In has been said that we are our story.  If we think we already know our story or the story of another person there is no us because it is not your story but the story I am imposing on you.  As soon as I label or name something or someone I have often decided I know all there is to know of their or its story. Empathy with the real person – the real story – is now impossible because the label or name tells me everything I need to know.   In  God is “I am” he/she/it has a story which has yet to be unfolded.
 
The United States often tells itself – we tell ourselves, “We are American. We are peaceful. We know best. Our needs are more important. Without us to name you there is no you. You do not have a story.  You have no promise, no story to put together, no spine, no surprise, no them and no wonder.  We are America – not one of the American states – but we are America.”
 
If Mullah Mohammad Mansour is merely a bad person, a terrorist it is easy to kill him.  If someone is a criminal  they do not have a story. I know all I need to know.  If someone is a republican, a democrat, an independent I need know no more.  
 
Without a story their can be no you or me.  Without a story there can be no empathy. With empathy there can be no tribe.  
 
I will tell you who I am.  There is a huge difference between you labeling  someone as a “woman” and she label her as, “I AM WOMAN”.
 
Written May 24, 2016

​Empathy – criminalization – sex workers
 
I often in my writing allude to the fact that in the United States, as well as many other countries, we seemingly increasingly criminalize a variety of behavior at a great financial, emotional, and I suspect, spiritual cost to the individuals we label as criminals and to the community at large.   As some others have remarked, we seem to criminalize behavior which we think is dangerous to the individual or the community as well as that which is not consistent with our personal sense of what is tasteful, right, ethical or moral.  Some believe that what is unique about the United States is the contrast or discrepancy between how we think of ourselves and how others think of us.  We seem to think of ourselves as this country which is peaceful/non-violent, accepting/inclusive, and non-judgmental. Yet, we lead so-called developed nations in the number of people we incarcerate, the length of time we keep them in jail, and the recidivism rate.  Many of the acts we determine are criminal concern our sexual behavior.
 
Criminal behavior of a sexual nature which is considered criminal and which is often considered a felony in the United States includes:
      Rape – physical force and/or statutory (age of consent varies as does age difference range).
      Molestation – physical or other types of force/use of power differential against a child which is alleged to be sexual in nature.
      Sexual assault – again, physical, emotional, use of any sort of power differential.
      Sexual exploitation.
      Sexual abuse of children.
      Illegal distribution of obscene and other sexual material (possessing or distributing a sexually explicit photo).
      Child pornography – these laws are generally written in such a way that they can and are used to convict someone who has material on their computer or otherwise in their possession which is considered sexual in nature. It can and has been used when there is intentional explicit sexual genital manipulation of a young child, when a young child is caught urinating on the lawn of his parent’s property, when a when a young child wants to play doctor with other children, or if a parent takes and has developed a photograph of a young child playing in a bathtub.
      Indecent assault – touching another person in a way which is alleged to be intentionally sexual.  (Has often been used in child custody cases by one parent who is very angry at the other parent.)
      Prostitution/solicitation Generally vague enough to be applied in a variety of situations.
      Using a bathroom for gender other than what is indicated on original birth certificate.
      Sexual harassment – can be vague enough to permit charges in a variety of situations.
 
How these and related laws are applied changes over time in particular states or other localities.  There have been laws in the United States (and still are in some other countries) which make it illegal to engage in a homosexual relationship, to perform oral sex, to have sex with an underage prostitute who lied about her age, for someone else to download pornography on one’s computer (one is frequently held responsible for what is on one’s computer even it is obvious that someone else had long distance or hands-on access to it).
 
Various religious groups forbid and in some places make it illegal to have any sexual contact outside of marriage.  Oher religious groups make it illegal for a woman to commit adultery but it is not illegal for the man to do so.
 
In the United States, depending on the state in which one lives or in which one is convicted of an act which is considered illegal and sexual in nature, one can easily end up – often for life – on the sexual offender’s registry which limits where one can live, what jobs one can have, and whether one can have physical contact with children.  These registries which contain charges and addresses of the individuals on it, are available to anyone. They can and often are used to shun or otherwise bully, ostracize, or harass individuals. Often people have little knowledge of the circumstances which resulted in the sexual offense designation.
 
Personally I grew up being told that there would be terrible results if one “played with oneself” or had sex outside of marriage.  Yet, as I recall, there were some allowances made for crazy Uncle John or the aunt who got a divorce and was alleged to be “dating” someone. I did not know anyone who had same sex relationships or went to jail for rape or other sexual assault charges.  I did know or hear of people who got pregnant in junior high and high school. I also knew or heard of people who got married at 14 or younger if they were pregnant. The person they married might be a peer or someone several years their senior.  It was known that there were those got feisty and there were those who were accused of having sex outside the marriage.
 
I would be well into my adulthood before I learned that healthy people had sexual relationships with someone of the same gender, that many people other than kings and queens had sex with someone other than their spouse, that healthy everyday people had some elements of S and M in their sexual relationships, that many enjoyed oral sex, that there were swingers in small, church going neighborhoods, and that there were high- priced male call men as well as male prostitutes.  I also learned that there were men who went to “adult bookstores” with glory holes frequented by men who considered themselves heterosexual but who enjoy oral sex even if the mouth was not that of their spouse or even that of a woman. These men call themselves men who have sex with men.  I also learned that many women had sex outside their marriage.
 
I met women who were sex workers or escorts, or “wives who “gave” sex to their husbands to stay in a marriage which was financially comfortable.
 
In recent years sexting has become possible for both young people and adults.  Although not everyone would suffer the fate of Congressman Weiner and have his sexting photo of his bulging underwear distributed to the masses, it soon became apparent that sending photos of oneself in various stages of sexual arousal was not limited to teenagers whose brains were not fully developed and, thus, often impulsive.
 
We can now see ads on the television in our very public living rooms, on billboards and in newspapers featuring under garments which are clearly much more than utilitarian.   Apparently, it is highly desirable for a most men to be able to attain an erection or most females to get aroused although it would appear, given the sale of enhancing drugs, that no males and possibly a significant number of females cannot do this without some chemical assistance.
 
At the same time, we continue to criminalize sex workers and often the people who use their services.  New Zealand is one of the few countries which has decriminalized sex work. It did so in 2003.
 
Toni Mac, an English sex worker in a January 2016 Ted Talk entitled, “The laws that sex workers really want” reminds us:
 
“Decriminalization means the removal of laws that punitively target the sex industry, instead treating sex work much like any other kind of work. In New Zealand, people can work together for safety, and employers of sex workers are accountable to the state. A sex worker can refuse to see a client at any time, for any reason, and 96 percent of street workers report that they feel the law protects their rights. New Zealand hasn't actually seen an increase in the amount of people doing sex work, but decriminalizing it has made it a lot safer. But the lesson from New Zealand isn't just that its particular legislation is good, but that crucially, it was written in collaboration with sex workers; namely, the New Zealand Prostitutes' Collective. When it came to making sex work safer, they were ready to hear it straight from sex workers themselves.”
 
She also states:
 
“Here in the UK, I'm part of sex worker-led groups like the Sex Worker Open University and the English Collective of Prostitutes. And we form part of a global movement demanding decriminalization and self-determination” …
 
Sex workers are real people. We've had complicated experiences and complicated responses to those experiences. But our demands are not complicated. You can ask expensive escorts in New York City, brothel workers in Cambodia, street workers in South Africa and every girl on the roster at my old job in Soho, and they will all tell you the same thing. You can speak to millions of sex workers and countless sex work-led organizations. We want full decriminalization and labor rights as workers.”
 
Contrary to the myths which are responsible for the punitive laws and the resulting ruined lives:
      We humans are very sexual beings beginning at birth and the sexual feelings become very powerful once we begin puberty although female and males hit their peak at different periods of their lives.
      In most places in the world we are not worried about “wasting sperm” because we need to fertilize more human eggs which one are going to need to have more children.
      Humans enjoy sexual activity for a variety of reasons in many variations.
      We are not very successful, as a group, in being monogamous.
      Most of us do not care what someone does sexually with another person who is able to freely consent.
      Our children will be sexual whether we approve or disapprove.  We have, for the most part, been lax in talking with them about how to deal with strong sexual feelings without shaming them.
      There is a relatively small group of people who have a powerful, compulsive, or addictive attraction to sex with very young children. We need to make it safe for them to get help in exploring options for dealing with these feelings without hurting others.
      We need to continue to make it safer for individuals to feel okay about their sexual feelings, their gender identity, and their need to make decisions about sexual behavior.
      We need to educate children and adults about sexually transmitted diseases – how they are transmitted, the symptoms, and how to prevent them.
      We need to review and change the laws about behavior which we may not like but which we cannot and should not legislate.
      Like it or not many successful marriages consists of individuals with a wide difference in age.
      We need to foster more talks and discussion in safe, respectful atmosphere such as the one by Toni Mac at Ted Talks.
 
 
Written May 23, 2016

​The business of criminalization
 
Early this morning while at the gym on the treadmill I was watching and listening to a television program on prisons.  This seems to be a regular program on Sunday morning although when I googled I was not sure I was identifying the same program. At any rate, again this morning I was challenged to question what I sometimes think I know or do not know about we humans and our ability to live with each other.  There were six groups of people associated with prisons featured on the program during the short time that I watched. There were:
 
      The guards and administrative staff.
      The health care team members including doctors, nurses, and counselors/psychologists.
      The mentally ill inmates convicted of and serving time for a crime.
      Those who have completed their sentence, but are determined to still be too dangerous to society to be released.
      The inmates who have been convicted of one  or more of a range of crimes falling under the general label of sexual predator.
      Those being treated for mental illness until they are competent to stand trial -  competent to stand trial is determined  by an assessment of their ability to understand their charges.
 
The individuals responsible for both the flavor and content of the program were careful to insure that the viewer understood that jails and prisons are now often the most common large-scale institution for housing the mentally ill.
 
At least during the time that I watched the program today and past Sunday mornings, no specific mention was made of the fact that jails and prisons are a significant piece of the economy in the United States.  In the past decade or two it has become more common to outsource prisons and jails.  Many of these contracts include a guaranteed occupancy rate. Many state and federal jails also outsource such services such as food service, medical care, supplies, inmate accounts, and other services.  Each of these can represent a significant profit for the company which provides the particular service.  One example is the cost to deposit money in an inmate account. This cost is borne by the friend or family member of the inmate.   
 
The mission of the judicial system, on the whole, in the United States is to protect the public from those who would commit criminal acts. There are, as most know, a significant number of codified criminal acts in the United States.  The definition of criminal act is determined by community, state, and federal laws.  Since the inception of the United States the determination of what constitutes a criminal act changes.   There was a time when interracial marriage, homosexual  acts between consenting adults, the use of even a small amount of marijuana or other “illegal” drugs, the purchase or selling of sexual activity, being nude or  otherwise exposed, and, of course, stealing, murder or otherwise taking advantage of the vulnerable when  it is not sanctioned by the some governmental authority.  Treating prisoners, mentally ill or other vulnerable members of a community as less then, killing to protect national interest or security by military or law enforcement groups such as the CIA, profiting from incarcerating people, purchasing a judgeship or other political office, or paying someone less than a living wage is not necessarily a crime.  Using sex to sell a product even if that product is a person running for political office or offering sex to a marriage partner for a high monetary profit are not crimes.  Mental illness is apparently a crime although no one is charged and convicted with being mentally ill.  One is charged and convicted with the act which may be performed because of a mental illness or because the community decided that mental health services were not a budgetary priority.
 
Once branded a common criminal as opposed to say, a white collar criminal, it is very difficult to re-establish oneself as a respected member of the community. Recently there have been some attempts to make the transition from convicted criminal to community member a little easier for some by re-instating voting rights and the right to housing assistance.   There are, however, many exclusions.
 
At the same time that we are spending a lot of money to ensure that the person labeled as a criminal does not have any self-respect, self-esteem, skills or license to earn a living once they are released from jail or prison, we may be experimenting with such programs as  those  discussed in the television program I saw this morning. That program was to teach empathy. It was the job of the counseling staff  to model empathy within a system designed to insure that the person convicted knew what a worthless person he (or she in other prisons) is. This raises some interesting questions:
      Can empathy be taught?
      Are some people incapable of empathizing because of physical difference such as the possible lack of mirror neurons?
      Is it safe to have empathy in a prison system?
      Can we simultaneously punish and teach such skills or qualities as empathy?
Actually when I began writing this morning I was going to examine these and related questions about empathy within the context of the judicial system.  I found myself addressing another question. That is the question of whether the dual motives of profit and punishment are consistent with creating a more just and safer community.   I assume, which may be dangerous, that all of us in a society want to believe and experience being valued and that we can afford to be empathetic.  Once we label and punish the mentally ill as criminals and then incarcerate them in a profit-making prison and jail system which requires the allegiance and loyalty of millions of employees to the lie that they are not and cannot be us or we cannot be them, then one must address the question of the efficacy of and even saneness of teaching concepts such as empathy to this population.  Please do not tell me you respect me even though I am worthless.  I am reminded of  what I frequently heard from so-called Christians, “Love the sinner but not the sin.”  Frequently this was said to someone whose sin was being the person they were born to be, i.e., gay.  Telling a person that they love them but hate who they are never did compute in my wee brain. It still does not.
 
It is not, of course, just a question about the mentally ill. There is an even larger question of the self-interest of those who create the laws which define who is to be considered a criminal. Is profit – financial or political – consistent with creating a more just and safer community?
 
Written May 22, 2016

The stories we tell ourselves
 
Not surprisingly to the  reader, I have this morning downloaded and listened to this week’s episode of On Being with Krista Tippett. This week Mrs. Tippett is talking with Kevin Kling about “The Losses and Laughter We Grow Into. (Recorded March 15, 2012)
As a counselor/psychotherapist and as a human being living my own story, I am often invited to explore with individuals and families the story they have been telling themselves and the possibility of allowing themselves a new story.  
Kevin Kling, the story teller, poet and wise man was born with his left arm disabled and shorter than his right.   In his forties he had a motorcycle accident and lost the use of his right arm.  In the process of healing (not curing as he is quick to point out) a therapist suggests that he tell the story of the accident, but give it a different ending.  The ending he had been giving himself was apparently one of fear, anger, regret, and possibly hopelessness (my words for what he was feeling). When he gave himself a different ending he was essentially allowing himself, as he later says in his poem, “Tickled Pink,”  “a new dance.  A Dance of Pink.”  One story is that the accident did happen. He did lose the use of his right arm. He does have to learn to function differently. He will not be able to do some of the things he did prior to the accident.  That is the truth.  It is true he has to learn to use the voice recognition software or dictate and hire a transcriber if he wants to write. It is true that doing everyday tasks which he had formerly learned to do with one good arm and one disabled arm may now require assistance.  If he wants independence he may now take public transportation unless, of course, he can hire a driver.  How he eats, sleeps, makes love, bathes, writes, and moves about in the world will be different.   
It is normal when we face such changes in our lives for we humans to become discouraged, even angry, and to focus on what we cannot do or what we cannot do in the same way we used to be able to.   The story we may tell ourselves is that our useful life is over.  We may even tell ourselves that life is not worth living if we have to live as an even more disabled person.  
By suggesting that Mr. Kling give the accident a different ending, the therapist helped him see that we are in charge of our healing story.  Even though the new accident story was a lie, he now had the possibility of other new stories. 
To a large extent, if we live long enough, we all will face increasingly limitations and even disabilities.  We may develop arthritis or hearing and sight problems. We may not be able to safely drive a car. We may function better in an assisted living setting or even a nursing home situation.  We may respond by:
·      Telling ourselves nothing has changed and challenging everyone in our life to pretend as if all is the same, while we burden them with responsibility for taking care of us.
·      Sinking into depression and hopelessness.
·      Wearing our Job costume and ask, “Why me?”
·      Hiding behind anger and punishing ourselves and others.
·      Exploring the benefits or positives of this new stage of or lives.
Only the last option will allow us to heal. Healing is giving ourselves a new dance – a new story.  It is the opportunity to live as the person we now are rather than waiting to finish the process of dying which could take years.   When the AIDS epidemic began to affect a significant number of people and there were no effective treatments, the story was that people were dying with AIDS.   Someone decided to introduce a new story line. The new story line was to suggest that we began to think of ourselves and our friends as living with AIDS. That was a hugely important paradigm shift. We were going to live until we died rather than dying day by day until the act of dying was completed.
 
When working with combat soldiers experiencing PTSD, the therapist might suggest that they first share the story of the pain, the heartache and the overall gruesome tragedy they have lived through.  One has to face the true story. This happened.  This, however, is not or does not have to be the end of the story or the only story. Some of those same people have then gone on to create music, plays, sculptures and paintings.  Some have become counselors who help other returning veterans explore ways using their experience to provide comfort and new dreams/stories.
Mr. Kling  says that he  shares both his tears and his laughter more in his new dance. He has become part of a theater group composed of performers with disabilities.  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that they are performers who know or admit they have disabilities.  We all have disabilities or limitations. Some are obvious and some not so obviously.    His life is both more expanded and more limited than it was prior to his accident.  But then, even without the accident, his life dance would be different today than it was yesterday.
There are those cultures or tribes of people who maintain that we are our stories. Some of us believe that life happens to us and some of us believe that we can take the raw material or ingredients and create our story.  There are cooking shows on radio or television where the host or the participants are challenged to create a meal out of a few ingredients found in a refrigerator.  Often, even frequently, the cook de jour takes five or six ingredients which the listener might think could never play with each other and creates an amazingly, yummy dish.   There are those, however, who might look at the same group of ingredients, cross their arms, and insist that nothing good can be created from them. They are not able to allow those ingredients to tell a new story.
I want to end by sharing Mr. Kling’s poem, “Tickled Pink” which beautifully “tells a new story:”
 
 
 
"At times in our pink innocence, we lie fallow, composting waiting to grow. And other times we rush headlong like so many of our ancestors.
But rush headlong or lie fallow, it doesn't matter.
One day you'll round a corner, your path is shifted.
In a blink, something is missing. It's stolen, misplaced, it's gone.
Your heart, a memory, a limb, a promise, a person.
Your innocence is gone, and now your journey has changed.
Your path, as though channeled through a spectrum, is refracted, and has left you pointed in a new direction.
Some won't approve. Some will want the other you.
And some will cry that you've left it all.
But what has happened, has happened, and cannot be undone.
We pay for our laughter. We pay to weep. Knowledge is not cheap.
To survive we must return to our senses, touch, taste, smell, sight, sound.
We must let our spirit guide us, our spirit that lives in breath.
With each breath we inhale, we exhale.
We inspire, we expire. Every breath has a possibility of a laugh, a cry, a story, a song. Every conversation is an exchange of spirit, the words flowing bitter or sweet over the tongue. Every scar is a monument to a battle survived.
Now when you're born into loss, you grow from it.
But when you experience loss later in life, you grow toward it.
A slow move to an embrace, an embrace that leaves you holding tight the beauty wrapped in the grotesque, an embrace that becomes a dance, a new dance, a dance of pink."  Kevin Kling
 
Kevin Kling


 Jim Pickett   Written May 21, 2016

​We is essential
 
Listening yesterday to Sebastian Junger’s Ted Talk, “Our lonely society makes it hard to come home from war” (posted May 2016)  was another poignant reminder that, with some exceptions, we humans are tribal/social animals.   Mr. Junger was a war correspondent for 15 years and became interested in PTSD and “dis eases” of those returning from living in active war situations.  Given his background in anthropology and his fieldwork on the Navajo reservation, he postulates that Native Americans, such as the Navajos, returning from fighting did not have PTSD because they were coming home to the tribe. 
 
The suicide rate among those, especially men, who were veterans of the Vietnam War has been very high.  The rate of suicide is not related to the extent of their involvement in active combat.  In fact, Mr. Junger explores  the question of the relationship between suicide of veterans and the kind of society veterans return home to.
 
For many years I counseled veterans, primarily Vietnam Veterans.  Although I am a veteran I was never in a combat situation and, in fact, never left the United States.  I was, however, working for/with those who were experiencing grief and often what would eventually be officially labeled as having post-traumatic stress syndrome.    I was also working with/for victims of domestic violence and those who were labeled as the perpetrators of domestic violence.   In both groups I often noted the  symptoms of depression.
 
I became very interested in those who, although scarred by their war experience or their experience of living in violent domestic situations, seemed to emerge relatively psychologically healthy.
 
I devoured books on surviving traumatic situations.  Books by such individuals as Phillip Caputo, Gloria Emerson, Lenore Walker, Dr. Alice Miller and others were very helpful.  Interviewing returning veterans who were doing relatively well was also a great source of help.   As I sit here, some years later, acutely aware that we continue to send a great many people into combat, have a high rate of domestic violence and foster the creation of a culture which is increasingly diverse and increasingly an us – them society, I am aware of the following:
 
·      Those in active combat situations with other individuals continue to experience a level of teamwork and closeness seldom found in neighborhood and work situations when they return home.   Those involved in organized team sports may experience a similar level of closeness and teamwork.
·      Those who survive traumatic situations relatively intact emotionally are those who (1) in the midst of a traumatic situations, without excessive use of alcohol or other drugs which would increase danger, are able to use time out moments to enjoy friendships, a letter from home, a sunset or sunrise tend to retain the ability to see both negative and positive when they return home and (2) those who return to a supportive family and a life which feels meaningful tend to fare better.
·      Even men and women who hate combat miss the closeness one experiences with one’s teammates/unit. There is an enormous closeness even among men when one is in  situations in which one is dependent on each other for survival.
·      Some have suggested that when we men are in a role  which is traditionally considered very masculine, we allow a level of affection and closeness with other men we do not otherwise allow. One’s masculinity cannot be questioned if one is fighting a war and engaging in a very tough physical, team sport such as football or hockey.
·      In the United States and in many other places the sense of tribe or extended family is less present for most people.  Living in a suburb where one uses a clicker to open and close a garage door before one enters the sanctity of one’s private home (with or without a nuclear family) which likely has a privacy hedge or fence insures that one does not have to deal with one’s neighbors (tribe).
·      More and more individuals are taking advantage of being able to work from home where they may or may not be taking care of children. Our sense of a work-time tribe may be limited to those we see at the library or at our local connected coffee shop.
·      We in the United States build more and more prisons which are not even administered by local, state or federal governments but by private firms.  We fill these prisons with those we labels as criminals, them, the bad people,  or the undesirable.  The sense of tribe is very limited in this, dangerous, frightening environment.
·      More and more children in the United States are homeschooled.
·      We know that a sense of disconnection from the tribe/family/community/self/God of one’s understanding is a both a symptom of depression and something which can cause depression.
·      One of the most common statements of someone who has become addicted to alcohol, drugs, sex, money, food, power or some other substance or activity is that they have never felt a part of a community/family/tribe.
·      Out of sight, out of mind, seems to be a coping mechanism.  Just this morning I was talking to a man who had just returned from a visit to Washington, DC with his brother. He remarked that he loved the fact that the city has been cleaned up and there are no homeless people in evidence.  He seemed offended when I asked what had happened to the homeless in DC.   He shrugged his shoulders and said, “Perhaps under the bridge.”
·      Terrorist groups and some criminal gangs have both a strong sense of community and a strong sense of moral purpose.
·      Fewer people are attending organized church services.  The May 20,2016 edition of the Huffington Post reports that with some exceptions fewer than 20% of people in the United States regularly attend a religious service.
 
Mr. Junger in his most recent Ted talk states:
 
“Certainly, modern society is hard on the human psyche by every metric that we have. As wealth goes up in a society, the suicide rate goes up instead of down. If you live in modern society, you're up to eight times more likely to suffer from depression in your lifetime than if you live in a poor, agrarian society. Modern society has probably produced the highest rates of suicide and depression and anxiety and loneliness and child abuse ever in human history. I saw one study that compared women in Nigeria, one of the most chaotic and violent and corrupt and poorest countries in Africa, to women in North America. And the highest rates of depression were urban women in North America. That was also the wealthiest group. “
 
Certainly there are those humans who work better in isolation, whose brain may be missing the ability or need to be empathetic and, thus, the need or desire to be close with others – to be an active member of a tribe. Research in recently years indicates this may be the case with those on the autism spectrum.   Most of us, however do better when:
 
·      We are an active member of the community – a tribe.
·      We recognize and honor the fact that we live in an interactional body and universe. We are interdependent.   At one level everything we do and, thus, everything we do not do affects the entire universe.
·      We will sink into depression with accompanying anger, violence, and disconnection or find ways of connection even if that connection is with a Third Reich or other terrorist group. (The Allies paid a high price for their treatment of the German people following World War I.)
 
A sense of “we” is essential for our survival.  We cannot survive or thrive long term without restoring the tribe.
 
 
Written May 20, 2016