​Sunday musings - May 30, 2021
Who is the “we”?


On this weekend in Tulsa, Oklahoma many are gathering for the 100th anniversary of the Tulsa Massacre of June 1921; gathering to celebrate the resilience of those who survived; to celebrate the emergence of history as it was and not as it is has been avoided; to celebrate those who are determined to use whatever means necessary to protect their community; to celebrate those who demand reparations in the symbolic form of money which is something the  oppressors value; to affirm that the “we” includes all members of the community.


This is a weekend when in the United States we remember our ancestors.  Memorial Day represents a day to remember those who served in the Armed Forces and especially those who died serving in the Armed Forces. It was originally known as Decoration Day.  It did not become an official Federal holiday until 1971.  I recall it as a day when the family would gather under the direction of Grandma Fannie at Sunrise Cemetery near Bristol, Oklahoma.   Family would arrive with flowers to place at grave sites, tools to cut the grass, tools to clean and repair grave markers and headstones, and baskets of food which were spread out on the covered picnic area or on blankets.  Thus, a meal could be shared with the “living and the dead”; the dead who lived on in the shared stories and, of course, in the DNA of all of the descendants.   The extended family were those connected by blood, by marriage, formally or informally adopted, and whoever else showed up.   This included many from various native tribes, some Caucasian and assorted mutts.  All were welcomed although I do not recall anyone identifying as “negro” per se.   Yet, it did include some whose family had been part of the Underground Railroad.      


Many stories were shared although I now know that some were not passed on. The history of such events as the Tulsa Massacre was nof known, or, if known, not shared. 


After moving from Chicago to Oklahoma my siblings and I attended a regional country school in Kellyville, Oklahoma.   My experience at that school did not seem to match those of many of my peers.  I recall lots of bullying of people of all races including this slight, non-athletic boy of dubious character who liked to read rather than play sports or engage in the Oklahoma country version of the dirty dozen.  I also remember many racist words and threats directed about and to blacks and Native Americans.  Although I have some pleasant memories of the school library and some of the teachers, my experience of male peers was one or constant fear and anxiety. I do not recall joining in racist comments, but I also do not recall ever being brave enough to “name” what was happening. I think I assumed reporting to the teachers or staff would result in harsh punishment from the other boys.   In my memory the girls were kinder; especially a couple who rode the same school bus.


At my grandmother’s house as well as that of my Aunt Pleasie (full blooded Cherokee) and Uncle Harold it seemed clear that all who showed up were welcome including those who were not "right" because of shell shock; even those females who defied all social norms by being divorced.   


Today I know that the so-called history of the United States was both redacted and altered to fit the needs of those who were sharing it.  This was as true for the official history books used in school as well as for the oral history shared at framily gatherings and in the classrooms. Although I knew the history shared at home was limited I had no idea how limited.   My own mother would deny being racist but always referred to “those people” who deserved rights and privileges  “as long as they stayed on their side of the track.”


Today I know that repatriations begins with unearthing the stories which have been buried with bodies, including those who died during the Tulsa massacre, the lynching’s and the rest of the oppressive truth hidden beneath the delusional history which was told.  Today I know that it is impossible to repay what has been lost although more than a token amount of momentary loss must be repaid.  Today I know that my story is not complete and may never be completed but more of it can be unearthed and shared.  Today I know that none of us can have a seat at the table as more than mannequins until the entirety of who we are - of the truth which was left out of the stories at the cemetery – is told in the bright light of today.  Today I know the “we” includes all of each of us - all our history.  We are all part of they “we”.   We have to share our stories at the table of inclusivity; the inclusivity of ourselves and all our neighbors on both sides of the track.


Written May 30, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
Coachpickett.org

She did not get the memo
 
Many of us have been waiting a lifetime for the gods to validate our worth?
 
How did we decide the gods of our understanding could determine our worth?
 
Who are these gods?
.
First our parents,
 
Then our peers,
 
Then those nameless others:
 
            The boy or girl who sits across the room.
            The cafeteria monitor.
            A slightly older peer.
            That first crush.
            That abusive partner.
            A cleric
 
They received our bows and our nightly prayers.
 
Perhaps we issued a viral proclamation
 
Extending the invitation to all the world.
 
Especially those who values are in opposition to ours.
 
Come one, come all we might shout.
 
Take a vote.  
 
No need for a  simple majority
 
A vote of one will determine our worth.
 
On the basis of
 
            Our race
            Our religion
            Our gender
            Our age
            Our size
            Our contribution to capitalism
            The gender to whom we pledge our love for a night or a lifetime
            The culture which birthed us and our ancestors
[1] 
 
I met a woman this morning who did not get the memo.
 
Queer in a small town in Oklahoma proudly claiming her right to represent her community in the  sate legislature.
 
The price for missing the memo?
 
Freedom from the gods of judgment
 
Freedom from the gods of imprisonment.
 
Freedom
 
Freedom
 
Freedom to celebrate the miracles of who she is.
 
Written May 28, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
Coachpickett.org

 [1]
​

Parental know best???


One often hears the assertion “parents know best”.   This morning I read the statement as a defense for a state bill which limits the ability of school districts to mandate masks and covid vaccines.   The executive director of the Oklahomans for health and parental rights defended the bill stating “Parents know what’s best whether it be for the masking or the vaccine.”


Most of us have heard this defense of the “right” of parents to make decisions about the welfare of their child.  Yet, the truth is that to parent is a verb and not a noun.  Very few of us were trained to be parents either directly or indirectly.  Most of us parent the way we were parented.  The result is often a lot of trauma for the parents and the children.


Legally all one has to do to be assigned the label of parent is to be able to have sex one time when a sperm introduces itself to an egg.   Sometimes one becomes a foster parent, an adoptive parent, or is given the role by default.  If a foster parent or an adoptive parent one might be required to take classes. For the most part, very few individuals have extensive training in how to parent.


We would never allow a person to call himself or herself an engineer, a doctor, or some other skilled professional without extensive training, testing and licensing.   If someone is the biological sperm or egg donor they do not have to pass any training or meet any other criteria. If one is the biological egg or sperm donor one has to commit a grievous error(s) before a child is removed from their care. 


In the United States and many other countries at this time parenting decisions are made by one or, at most, two poorly trained adults.   We call this the nuclear family.  There is no village  of loving, educated people with a clear core value system making decisions for and with children which are designed to teach children how to be a loving, contributing members of the community.


The legal parents of children will often make decisions based on their own fears, misinformation provided by a non-expert such as a politician, or on their need to prove that they have the power.   In the case of whether to require a mask or to get vaccinated for covid-19, the decisions need to be made by health care professional who are not embedded with politicians, pharmaceutical companies or other vested interest personnel. 


Clearly, in terms of masks, we know they offer protection against covid-19 as well as other air  borne diseases such as the flue and even the common cold.  We know they are also uncomfortable and impede some aspects of communication. On the other hand we have an plethora of medical evidence for the efficacy of wearing them as us evidence by the practice of certain other countries.   


We already require certain vaccinations if children are to be allowed to be with other children in a school setting.  This has traditionally been a health care decision although there has been a movement in the country for some time to allow parents to opt out of vaccinations because of feared side effects.   Even if there was scientific evidence that there is some risk involved in getting vaccinations for covid-19, the risks of not getting them are, according to scientists, much greater.   We do not have the right to expose others to potential infections if we can avoid it by simple vaccinations.


Medical personnel might, long term, make different recommendations regarding both masks and vaccinations.  Medical personnel are not always right, but statistically and in terms of training they are better qualified then those with other agenda to make health care decisions.   Clearly they are better qualified than most sperm and egg donors.  Parent often do not know what is best.


Written May 27, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org

​The pain/trauma meter
 
In an episode of Hidden Brain entitled Tribes and Traitor, host Shankar Vedantam talks with a Palestinian man and an Israeli Soldier about what happens when one empathizes with one’s enemy.   The benefit and the cost can be great.  While listening to the program I was again reminded that life is often much simpler when one can neatly divide the world by affixing labels to individuals and groups.  Terms such as enemy can create such a neat division.  As the guests of his program reveal, empathizing with one’s enemy – no longer seeing them as just the enemy who causes one pain but as another individual or group who has known great pain and suffering – can be viewed as very disloyal – even traitorous – by one’s neighbors or even one’s family. 
 
It seems as if we often have a fear that if we honor the pain of those we have labeled as our enemy the validity of our pain will be diminished.  Yet, it is very likely the opposite will happen; honoring the pain of our “enemy” opens the door for us to honor both our pain and their pain.
 
The simple truth is that we have all experienced pain.  This is equally true of individuals, communities, and countries.  It is also true that we have all caused pain.  I know of no way to measure individual or collective pain.  Certainly, there are few events in history to rival the Holocaust.  Honoring that pain does not diminish the pain of Palestinians in not having a country or being treated as if they have no right to housing, their own government and taking care of their families. 
 
No matter what religion, what God or what history is used to justify violence the only product of violence Is more violence. No matter what slice of history is served to justify violence the hurt are hurting the hurt.
 
Clearly there are those  who need to be restrained from further violence.  Do we use violence to stop them?  If someone suffers from dementia we lovingly restrain them if they become violent toward themselves or others.  We do not  punish them for not being able to have a shared reality?  When two people get into an argument and whip out their legal guns to shoot at each other in a crowded public space should we treat them as untouchbables or throw aways or should we begin to look at the fact that we, as representtives of communities and nations use guns and other weapons of mass destruction when we are offended by or upset with another person or nation.  As a nation the United States advocates lethal violence as a way of dealing with those we determine are a danger to our national interests.  We alone decide what is in our national interest no matter how it affects others.   Selling weapons, sending troops, ordering assignations or other violence actions are considered our “God given right”.  Why are we surprised that many individuals resort to the same tactics?   I am not suggesting that the United States is the only country to advocate and use violence.  I am suggesting  we continue to delude ourselves by asserting we are a peaceful – even nonviolent – nation.  Violence is a way of life in this country.   If we truly want to become less violence we must be very intentional to model non-violent resolutions of differences. We must truly believe that resourses are intended to be shared; that oppression is always violent and never acceptable.
 
Empathy is not achieved by self-righteous justification of our hurt/pain while ignoring or denying the pain of others.   Empathy is not achieved by responding to our own hurt by hurting others.
 
Loving our enemies is not a one liner sound bite.  Loving our enemies paradoxically means identifying with their pain; using our third eye to see the pain beneath the shield of anger or violence.  Loving our enemies involves removing the log from our eyes which prevents us from seeing and mourning our own pain. Loving our enemy involves a leap of faith which is the foundation of all spiritual practice.
 
Written May 25, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
 
 

Sunday Musings - May 23, 2021
Hurt people hurt people


As is true for many individuals and especially those living in Palestine and Israel, I am grateful for the temporary cease fire.  Of course, everyone is acutely aware that fighting could resume anytime.  We are also acutely aware that fighting continues in many places on a community and often national level.   In the United States mass shootings as well as violence between individuals in homes and in public places takes place daily.  Just this morning I read of two men who got into an argument, pulled out guns and shot each other.  The use of lethal force by police in these United States continues to be an all-too-common experience leaving both officers and private citizens dead and/or otherwise traumatized.  In the United States the private sales of guns, in addition to the guns manufactured and sold to individuals and government bodies, keep rising.   So many of us humans are convinced that we have the right to protect possessions and people by killing others. 


Most of us know that our anger is almost always a shield to hide the history of pain from actual or imagined events.  We know pain may, at times, be a symptom of  exhaustion from not getting the emotional, physical, or spiritual food we need to survive.  It may be related to a history of abuse in this or former life journeys.  It may be related to fear originating in an injured or damaged brain.  


In other words, we know that hurt people hurt people.  We can easily trace the history of pain of Palestinians and the Jewish people.  We can easily trace the history of the pain of those who have inflicted pain on Palestinians and Jews long before the post-World War II creation of the Israeli State.  We can also easily trace the history of pain of individual Germans such as Hitler or the German people post World War I.   Vera Britain in her three volume Testament of Youth does a commendable job of connecting these events.  Alice Miller, the psychiatris, in several of her works details the connection between traumatic events and the cruel dysfunction of famous people such as Hitler.  We do not need a social scientist to trace the relationship between our own pain and our unkind thoughts and behavior.  


We know all this and yet we continue to justify our individual and collective hurtful behavior by neatly dividing us humans into groups which we label as good, moral, bad, criminal, evil a plethora of other labels. 


Father Greg Boyle, the author and the priest who works with and for those who are trying to leave the violent life of Los Angeles gang membership, traces the history of pain which leads to survival behavior which is then labeled as bad or criminal. His books includes Tattoos on the Heart,  Barking to the Choir - The Power of Radical Kinship and Shoulder to Shoulder.    


Wise teachers such as Jesus, stated the obvious when he is credited in the Gospel of Matthew (5:43-44) with saying, “But I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” If hurt people hurt people; if bad behavior stems from pain, then it should be obvious that love and not hate can heal.   We are not, of course in charge of whether someone can receive our love. Many factors will affect that possibility.   We can only genuinely offer love. We can only refuse to cause more pain.  How many times must we respond to have with love?  Again, we turn to that wise teacher, Jesus.   In Matthew 18:21-22 it is reported: “Then came Peter to him (Jesus), and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him?  Till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but seventy times seven.”




Hurt people do not find it easy to trust.  They are not likely to allow love to touch their pain the first or even the tenth time.   There may be nothing in their history that tells them it is safe to trust love.   Yet, our only power is to not add to the pain.  If enough of us consistently refuse to respond to pain with pain, we will stop the cycle of violence.  We will refuse to do our part to keep the cycle going.


Sounds simple but, obviously, if a bomb has just killed your family and blown up your home, it is not simple or easy to respond with love.  Yet, that is exactly how the people at the synagogue in Pittsburgh responded and that is exactly how the people in a North Carolina church responded following violent deaths at their place of workshop.    “Father forgive them for they know not what their so.”   If they can refuse to respond to hate/fear/violence with hate and violence so can we.   Every time we do so it gets easier.  Soon this behavior is embedded in our muscle memory.


Written May 23, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org

Earthling


Daily I am challenged spiritually, intellectually, and emotionally to consider the possibility of being more expansive.  While listening to the May 20, 2021 rebroadcast of the February 27, 2020 conversation between Krista Tippett host of the podcast On Being and the astronomer Jill Tarter, I considered Dr. Tatter’s challenge to identify as an earthling and not as a male, Caucasian, United States citizen, counselor, or single person.    As soon as I considered expanding my identity to that of Earthling all the ways that us earthlings use to attempt to separate us from each other disappear.  It also opens a new level of appreciation for the strong possibility that we are just one group of intelligent life forms in the Universe or Universes. Once one erases the separating it is not only easier to envision being a member of a group with has shared concerns and responsibilities, but it also forces on to think how our behavior here on this planet affect and is affected by the rest of the universe(s).   


I have never been able to convince myself that we earthlings are the only possible intelligence life forms; that we earthlings are worthy of the inflated importance which we seem to need to believe to give this life journey meaning.   At some level we know that we are part of a much larger whole; that our brief sojourn requires a recognition that the tiniest life form is just as important to our existence as we are to it; that when we disturb or kill one part of this living planet it affects the entire planet.  It seems axiomatic that this would be true of the entire universe(s).   We are both very significant and insignificant.  If indeed this is true, how does it make sense that we are the only intelligent life form? Dr, Tarter and her colleagues are charged with the responsibility and the opportunity to explore these and related questions.  For example, she suggests that one needs to think of the possibility that water is not the only possible solvent. She says: “Definitely, but we need to distinguish between what we know and what we think is but have not yet verified and found evidence for. We still are welded to the idea of liquid water because all biology that we know, here on this plant, uses that as a solvent. But at least some of the community has begun to think out of the box or more broadly about what Iife is, and could there be life using some solvent other than water or some anchoring element other than carbon?”


I have always loved what I think of the scientific approach which requires one begin each inquiry with the null hypothesis.  The reader will recall that a null hypothesis is a hypothesis that says there is no statistical significance between the two variables in the hypothesis.  That is, if one thinks that x ingredient creates a more efficient Y then the null hypothesis would be “X ingredient does not create a more efficient Y.”   In other words, if one wants to learn or be creative one applies the null hypothesis to what one has learned or believed.


If I already know what I know then there is nothing to learn. If I do not know what I do not know then there is much to learn.  If I believe that being a white, human male is all that I am then there is no reason to consider the concept of humans.  If I believe that human is all that I am then there is no reason to think of earthling.  If there are multiples planets I must allow for the fact of multiple intelligent beings.   If there are multiples universes than I must allow for the possibility that there are multiple forms of what we call intelligence.


Today I will open to being identified as an earthling and all that might imply.


Written May 21, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org

​If god was an adult?
 
As a parent and someone who has contact with many teenagers in my personal and professional life, I often remind myself of the normal or healthy developmental characteristics of teenagers. Of course, these are often culture and circumstance specific. Some individuals are forced through circumstances to move from infant or child to adult responsibilities.  For those who do not have to skip this developmental stage the following characteristics are normal:
 
·       Frequent and quick change of mood.
 
·       Self-centered and prone to take behavior of others personally
 
·       Creative
 
·       Impulsive
 
·       Fearless regarding physical danger.
 
·       Emotionally fragile
 
·       insightful
 
·       Suspicious of others – especially adults
 
·       impatient 
 
·       All or nothing thinking
 
·       Concerned about what others think of them while needing to pretend as if one does not
            care what others think.
 
·       Protective of their own boundaries while often insensitive to that of others.
 
           
Depending on the home and general cultural situation expectations of teenage males and females may vary.   Very often, even in this age of lip service to feminism, more is expected of girls in terms of nurturing chores and more is expected of boys in terms of physical chores.  This may not be as true for those living on a family farm or ranch when it is all hands on deck much of the time,
 
At any rate my experience with teenagers is that they are delightful, funny, insightful, challenging, frustrating, and engaging all in the space of five minutes. 
 
We hope, of course, that teenagers will become responsible, creative, loving, interdependent, other centered, insightful, patient, adults with a good sense of humor.    Sadly, when addiction, some other mental illness or trauma interrupts developmental stages of human development one may not move through developmental stages but stay stuck in adolescent or even pre-teen stages,
 
It often seems when us humans posit a concept of a higher being or God we assign them the most frustrating characteristics of teenagers while calling them father, teacher or some other adult term.  The Greeks, on the other hand, often  posited gods who were unabashedly delightful, impulsive, fun teenagers.   Native people in many parts of the world posit spirits or Gods who often are both ethereal and very practical.    The God of Western culture seem to have all the most frustrating characteristics of human teenagers.    Some of these characteristics are:
 
·       Self-centeredness of only children who know they are the center of the universe and expect to be treated accordingly.
 
·       Jealous - strong need to be the only god and for others to honor that fact.
 
·       Quick to anger if one displeases.
 
·       Punishing - often for eternity
 
·       Moody
 
·       Insecure - always testing
 
·       Perceptive - sees and hears all.
 
·       Score keeper
 
·       He or she who cannot be viewed but wants to be the center of attention.
 
·       Delightfully creative
 
·       Wise
 
·       Ever present - is leery of privacy of others.
 
 
One wonders why we posit or envision a God who develops or morphs into the human version of a normal teenager.  Creators of artificial intelligence are often concerned that AI will morph into an adolescent god instead of “the healthy adult”.
 
If God were an adult he or she might have more of the characteristics of a Jesus or a Buddha.  The characteristics of such a god might me:
 
·       Quick to laugh at self.
 
·       Non-judgmental.
 
·       Unsurprised that humans are humans.
 
·       Owns his or her own issues.
 
·       Focused on learning and teaching and not punishment.
 
·       Conforms to the laws of expanding views and knowledge of science.
 
·       Fun and creative.
 
·       Responsible and dependable - a little less mysterious
           
·       Non-sexist
 
·       Non-binary
 
·       Non-homophobic
 
·       Not so enamored of meditating and harp playing
 
·       Plays nicely with others
 
I am sure each reader can add to this list of characteristics or design one of their own.  The bottom line is us humans need to decide whether we want to be adults or forever teenagers. If adults, perhaps we need to envision or posit a god who has adult characteristics.  Perhaps if women were more often in charge of positing or envisioning god(s) they would be closer to our idealized version of a healthy adult.  Perhaps then humans could adopt adult characteristics  while working, laughing, creating and crying together.
 
Written My 21, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org
 

“The truth”


Recently, I had the pleasure of talking to a young man of 51 while we were both in the waiting room of a local establishment.  Our conversation revealed that the young man and his wife are the owner of a business with over 20 franchised businesses who pay a royalty to the parent business.  By all account he and his wife have been successful in growing their business.   This same young man has also attended bible college and is a youth pastor of a local church.  He has been involved in church sponsored missions in South America and is considering this as his primary profession.   As we chatted, he was clear that he and the religious institution he represents sincerely believes that their religious beliefs represents the “true beliefs” about God and what He requires of men and women if they are to experience eternal life or salvation.  I questioned that the leaders of the religion which he represents could possibly know that they had the only possible truth about God and His plans.   I further suggested that one has to consider the fact that all most major religions posit the belief that their God is the one true God. Some religious organization such as the Unitarian Universalists allow for the belief of many different Gods or concepts of God and many different version of the purpose of this human journey. 


Our conversation was mutually polite and respectful.  Yet, neither of us were swayed by the beliefs of the other.  He will continue to believe and preach that there is only one truth about God and His demands or expectation of us humans and the rest of creation and I will continue to believe that all religious or philosophical beliefs are equally valid.  I suspect that many of our beliefs about how we are to treat each other are similar and, in fact, are consistent with the purported “Sermon on the Mount” the essence of which one finds in the sacred texts of many religions.  We might disagree about the history of the teaching of such issues as honoring the sexual orientation of individuals, whether violence is ever justified, the equality of men and women, abortion and a host of other day to day behaviors.  I understand religious teachings or the revelation of the prophets in the context of the historical period in which the prophet lived.  I believe certain teachings or potential truths can only be understood when one has the “tools” to examine them


In any religious framework one can find justification for what one needs or wants to believe.   In the Christian religion one can understand the use of such terms as Jesus or Lord as nouns or verbs. Obviously, Jesus is the name of what is purported to be a historical person who was born to an unwed mother and grew up to become a carpenter and a teacher; a man whose teachings were so threatening to the status quo that he was crucified.   The words Jesus and Lord could also be understood to be verbs denoting a way of living,  the primary focus of which is to live in community with each other and Mother Earth.  To live in community could be understood to share responsibilities and resources  - from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. (Popularized by Karl Marx).    In the Jewish religious, the Muslim religion and all the other major religions there is an equivalent teaching.   Yet, in each religion there is much disagreement about how to live this very simple principle. Thus, one can fight over the sharing of land and other resources.  One can maintain that one has the only direct line to the one true God.


There might be some basic rules or principles which many of can agree guide us in our quest to be our best.   We might, for example, agree that we would all have a more qualitative life if we treated others the way we want to be treated; we accepted that we have different talents and abilities; many factors affect how our brain works or does not work; and it takes a village.  We might agree that we do not have a very scientific system for adding and comparing the “sin points for each of us; that we are all pretty creative at times and at other times our brains and hearts seem to be taking a nap.  We might not agree.  The truth?


Written May 19, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org

The Art of Lying


After seeing the independent film “The Wake of Life” I was thinking of the times that I have told myself a story only later to discover that I was lying to myself and, consequently, by default, unintentionally, lying to others.   In the film both the daughter and the father engage in behavior over a period of years which is motivated by a desire to meet the perceived needs of the other.  The daughter wraps her identify in being the caretaker of her father who she tells herself cannot function on his own. The father wraps his identity in being the disabled person who gives daughter a purpose for her life.  Both of them become trapped in the story they have created.   In order for the lies to be effective and believable story lines they must each sincerely believe them.   Spoiler alert:   They do, in the end, confront their lies and each begins a new chapter.


Theoretically it “should” be easy to determine when one is lying to oneself.  After all, if one created the lie, one should be able to admit it and correct it.  Yes, embarrassment or false pride about the fact that one lied keep one from admitting it.  One might also have to face the possibility one is expected to explain why one lied. One might simply and truthfully say that it seemed easier at the time than admitting to the truth.  This is especially understandable if one lied about a violation of the relationship contract with someone.  It is frightening to entertain the possibility that one’s partner might not be able or willing to forgive one.   It is also understandable why one might lie to one’s boss about the reason one did not complete a project or assignment in time.  One does not want to admit that one just procrastinated or avoided because one found it tedious and even redundant paperwork.  


Many of the lies I have told myself and others are about a behavior or quality which I did not want to believe about myself or which did not fit the story I had told myself.  For example, since I am a man of a short stature and do not think of myself as that educated or talented I told myself that I could never be intimidating.  I was shocked when a very large man told me t I intimidated him.  He went on to tell me that my ability to debate - use of language and presentation style - could be experienced as humiliating and demeaning.  I had to ask myself why I was shocked. I had obviously very deliberately chosen and practiced the use of words and presentation style. Yet, it was as if one part of my brain made these decisions and refused to share this process with other parts of my brain.


Some of the lies I told myself was because I wanted to believe something about myself. I wanted, for example, to believe I had internalized few lies about racism and other forms of oppression.  When required by others on a committee on which I served to write about my earliest memories of being racist I “uncovered” memories of both awareness of and use of racism to avoid responsibility as early as ages 3 to 5.   When I vehemently insisted that I was not homophobic while denying my own sexual orientation I had to confront my own duplicity.  When I “noticed” behavior which was consistent with what women were reporting about their unfair and unequal treatment by other men I had to face my own sexism.  When I had to accept my powerlessness as a father and my “need” to prove I could be the father I envisioned in my head I was shameful and humbled.  When I discovered I could not honor my marriage vows “in sickness and in health” I had to question my own character. 


This process of uncovering the volumes of lies I tell myself and others, is, I have discovered, a lifelong process.  The process of just noticing the lies and not telling another lie to cover the sense of shame and disappointment requires daily practice, humility and intention.


Written May 18, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org

Sunday Musings - May 16, 2021
Righteous vs self-righteous anger?


As a very young man I was very shy about expressing my opinions although I observed a lot and was acutely aware when something did not feel “right” to me.  As I grew to become a young man I was increasingly aware of how often anger took control of my voice.  At that stage of self-awareness the anger which erupted most often seemed unrelated to what I mouthed.  Very slowly i became aware I really wanted to shout:


            Racism was wrong, wrong, wrong.
            Sexism is wrong.
            Homophobia is wrong.
            justification for any oppression is wrong, wrong, wrong.
            War is wrong.




At this stage of my life my anger was often directed at others.  Others obviously deserved my judgmental anger.  They were bad people. I was judging others for my perception that they were judgmental.   My anger was self-righteous.   I was right and other were wrong.    The religious leaders I knew at that time seemed to agree that the God of their and my understanding was angry at these bad people. 


There was a part of me which was very confused about the fact that the God of my understanding as revealed in Christ also expected us to love our enemies; to accept that we all sin and fall short the glory of God; to accept it made no logical sense that one could count the sin points of each of us and decide who was better or more righteous.


At the same time I believed and continue to believe that all of us have a role to play in creating a more just and loving world; a world in which all of us share the work and the resources; a world in which we respond to the pain underlying the “bad behavior”; a world in which we act as if we sincerely believe the worlds of The Sermon On the Mount; a world in which financial profit does not determine our attitude towards guns; a world which does not allow others to determine our behavior.


As I age, I am acutely aware:


·       It is important to one speak out clearly and firmly for justice which is not racist, sexist,
            homophobic, ageist or oppressive in any manner.


·       It is important to be aware of all the ways that I am homophobic, sexist, racist, or oppressive.


·       It is important to be aware one’s invitation to share the table is conditional on one’s ability to treat everyone else at the table with respect and unconditional love; to respect the decision of others to not share the table when they are unable to do that.




I am not convinced that anger is ever useful. I do not believe violence ever wins. This includes verbal, physical, emotional and institutional violence. At the same time, I must do my part to as a member of any organization, including the body politic, by clearly refusing to obey any new Jim Crow law or any law which treats others as less that; to refuse to obey any laws which suggests that one must not teach anything in school which leaves the privileged group uncomfortable.  My refusal to obey such laws must be spoken with clarity and enough loudness to be heard over the noise of the fear masked as righteous anger. I must also focus on removing the remaining logs of oppressive thoughts and actions from my own eyes.  I know, of course, whether I am emphasizing or identifying with the person with a spec in his or her eye; whether I am laughing at myself and whether I am relearning all that I knew as a very young child.


Perhaps there is more effective language to describe the difference between what I am terming self-righteous vs righteous anger.   Perhaps there is a way to passionately express one’s refusal to accept justification for oppressive behavior in any form from oneself, others or institutions without it being heard as anger or weak.  This old man is still searching for a way to honor his passion; to speak the truth as he understands it without oppressing others.


As we search our hearts, debate in churches, temples, classrooms, legislative chambers and synagogues, perhaps we will find a way to take oppression very seriously without taking ourselves so seriously.
                       
Written May 16, 2021
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org