Sunday, November 6, 2016
REPOST: HILLARY CLINTON WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES-NOT YOUR MOTHER
REPOST: HILLARY CLINTON WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT-NOT YOUR MOTHER
National Catholic Reporter
THE INDEPENDENT NEWS SOURCE
On the first evening of the Democratic National Convention, the team at the "PBS NewsHour" kicked-off its coverage with group interview of Robby Mook, Hillary Clinton's campaign manager.
Taking his turn to question Mook, "NewsHour" commentator and New York Times columnist David Brooks focused on Clinton's low poll numbers in the category of "likeability and trustworthiness."
"Could you give us an anecdote or two," Brooks asked, "of her being nurturing, kind, surprising to the public image?" Brooks chuckled as he said the word "kind."
In the three months since the convention, in a campaign that has offered one stunning double standard after the next, it almost goes without saying that no journalist would ever think to question a male candidate's capacity to be "nurturing" or "kind."
But by using such maternal adjectives, Brooks inadvertently revealed one of the key reasons, I believe, that so many still insist that Hillary is unlikable: she just doesn't come across as a mother figure.
Last week, a Public Religion Research Institute poll reported some relatively good news: only 38 percent of white Catholic women now support Donald Trump.
But there was troubling data as well: 58 percent of white Catholic men, 71 percent of white evangelical Protestant men, and 60 percent of white evangelical Protestant women still support Trump.
These figures are especially disturbing since, in addition to his volatility, his use of racist, xenophobic and sexually predatory language, his limited ability to articulate sentences, and the fact that he is radically unqualified for the job of president of the United States, Trump's behavior and beliefs hardly reflect Christian or Catholic values.
So what, then, could be the tie that binds Catholic men, and evangelical men and women, to Trump? The answer, I believe, lies in Catholic and evangelical understanding of the role of women.
Catholic teaching, particularly in John Paul II's Theology of the Body, makes clear that men and women have different, but supposedly complementary, purposes. Men are leaders, women are nurturers; men are actors, women are receivers. Even the writings of Pope Francis routinely reinforce that a woman's highest purpose is the birthing and mothering of children.
Though Catholic women in the U.S. have largely rejected the church's teaching on women and gender roles, many Catholic men, unaware of the depths of their privilege in the church and society, have been slower to reject these teachings.
Catholic teaching on gender roles does resonate deeply with evangelicals and conservative Catholics, who strongly object to feminism and feminist ideas about women's equality, and who regularly exalt women's primary identity as mothers and caretakers.
Looking at Clinton's sometimes-fraught history with the media, one could almost pinpoint the origin of her so-called unlikeability to that fateful moment in 1992 when a reporter from ABC's "Nightline" asked her why she chose to continue practicing law after her husband was elected governor of Arkansas.
"You know, I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas," Clinton explained, "but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession, which I entered before my husband was in public life."
Her response was quickly interpreted as a disparagement of stay-at-home moms.
And regardless of what Clinton would accomplish on behalf of children and families in the years since, she would be branded as a cold, calculating, ambitious and inhuman creature who eschews what many of us have been taught to believe is a woman's greatest vocation in life: to be a mother, a nurturer, a homemaker.
Sure, some argue that they don't like Hillary because of Benghazi, or her misuse of an email server, or the Clinton Foundation's alleged practices. "She is corrupt" and "she is a liar" are two frequent refrains. But the truth of the matter is, as The New Yorker recently stated:
Clinton is distrusted in ways that have little to do with her own choices, beyond the choice to be part of public life. She has been the target of twenty-five years of hatred, misogyny, and conspiracy-mongering, endlessly metamorphosing from one confected "scandal" to another.
The dislike of Hillary has always been far more personal than professional. This is made clear in the criticisms regularly lobbed at her, all of which could probably be divided into two categories: supernatural and unnatural.
The "supernatural" attacks are most obvious in Trump's likening her to the devil and declaring that she has hatred in her heart. His supporters' chants of "lock her up" evoke the frenzied malice of angry mob at a witch trial. Campaign slogans demand that this diabolical woman be taken down, or even taken out: "Hillary for prison"; "Trump that bitch"; "Kill the bitch of Benghazi."
She's often called "the lesser of two evils," though no one ever seems to account for what precisely she has done to achieve such a cosmic level of darkness.
The "unnatural" criticisms can be more subtle, but they are plentiful: "I just don't like her"; "she can't connect with people"; "she is unrelatable"; "she is robotic."
Whether metaphysical or personal, all of these potshots aimed at Clinton ultimately say the same thing: she just doesn't feel like a natural woman. She's not the kindly, nurturing mom that she, by the very fact of her gender, ought to be.
Even some of those who support Clinton feel compelled to name their unease and distrust of her. It's not uncommon to hear people, who are otherwise progressive and reasonable, say, "She's far from perfect," or "She just doesn't seem nice," or "I just can't get excited about voting for her."
Such reactions are visceral, not substantive. They are qualifiers that are never applied to male candidates. Indeed, they sound much more like the grumbles of a petulant child, than the mature, informed assessment of a presidential candidate.
Since she first came into the public eye during her husband's presidential campaign, Clinton has been challenging traditional gender roles, and now she is bidding for the most powerful job in the world. If she becomes president, she will become a global symbol of women's equality.
As I wrote in my column back in August, Catholic women who seek equal roles in the church through priesthood are treated with deep suspicion. They are condemned by the hierarchy for acting against the natural order and are often criticized, by both men and women alike, for being controlling, power-hungry and ambitious.
The parallels between the demonization of women who seek equality in the church and women who seek equality in political office are not coincidental. Church teaching has greatly contributed to the demonization of women who aspire to be leaders and women who pursue power equal to the power historically allotted to men alone.
Last week, NCR's Tom Reese wrote, "the white Catholic vote has proven to be one that has been most in play during this election. Where they finally land could determine the election."
Election Day, in some ways, promises to be a day of reckoning. As Catholics go to the polls, they, too, must reckon with the ways in which their inculcated understandings of women and traditional gender roles might be contributing to their dislike of Clinton.
As Catholics, we have been so schooled in the veneration of the perfect mother that it may be hard to discern the depths to which the image of the fantasy maternal figure is distorting our perception of the first woman who could become our president.
By obsessing over Clinton's personality traits, rather than focusing on the abilities and experience she would bring to the presidency, are we participating in the infantilizing Catholic idea that women should be judged based on their capacity to nurture and be kind? How can we stop perpetuating a culture where a woman's value is determined by how motherly we perceive her to be?
Hillary Clinton wants to be president of the United States, not your mother. She is the most qualified, capable and experienced candidate to run for this office in generations. The only person she needed to mother was her daughter, Chelsea, and she has done a fine job of that.
Hillary Clinton is not an unnatural woman. What is unnatural is the obstruction of women's talents and abilities from all forms of leadership, which for millennia has stunted the growth of untold communities, religious groups, and nations. We have seen the damage that the restrictions on women have done to our own church. Let's not allow the most dangerous presidential candidate in U.S. history to become leader of the free world simply because we cannot discern, like mature adults, the best choice for our country's future.
[Jamie L. Manson is NCR books editor. She received her Master of Divinity degree from Yale Divinity School, where she studied Catholic theology and sexual ethics. Her email address is jmanson@ncronline.org.]
https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/hillary-clinton-wants-be-president-not-your-mother
Live simply.
Speak gently.
Love unconditionally.
Friday, October 14, 2016
GRANDMA MEG'S VIEWS ON THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE, SUNDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2016
PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE SUNDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2016
From the beginning of the second Presidential Debate, I felt
uneasy in my own living room watching as Trump stalked,
grimaced, and hurled threats at Mrs. Clinton. However, Mrs.
Clinton remained dignified and presidential under
deplorable circumstances. I admire her aplomb.
Guy Benson, a FoxNews contributor tweeted:
“He (Trump) improved, exceeded expectations, decisively
won several exchanges. She could have landed a death blow
tonight and did not.”
For the life of me, I do not understand how Trump
“improved, exceeded expectations, (and) decisively
won several exchanges.” Trump’s churlish behavior reminded
me of my former life as a fifth grade teacher. There was at least
one overgrown boy who swaggered around the playground
bullying others and trying to catch the girls’ eyes. Looks as if
Trump’s pubescent personality persevered.
I was affronted by Trump’s public shaming of Mrs. Clinton
because of her husband’s infidelities. Why should fingers be
pointed as if she were responsible for the choices Mr.
Clinton made. Many women, including myself, know how
traumatic and humiliating it is to be in Mrs. Clinton’s shoes.
In spite of the obstacles thrown in Mrs. Clinton’s path, she is
as energetic, resilient, and persistent as ever.
Surely, these are the characteristics of a great president.
Now the tables have been turned and Trump is being
shamed because of his despicable behavior towards women.
Several brave women made the difficult decision to
come forth to give credence to the allegations of Trump’s long
history of groping. As the presidential election draws near, it is
more likely that Trump’s past will be coming home to roost.
As for the next debate, I don’t know if my nerves can stand
watching. Perhaps as Trump spews out his ghastly
diatribe, he will have a meltdown as did The Wicked Witch of the
West. Or I can settle for throwing popcorn at Trump from my
favorite recliner.
Thursday, October 13, 2016
Repost from Michael Moore: Trump Is Not the Only Grabber Who Must Go
From: "Michael Moore"
Date: Oct 11, 2016 2:48:21 PM
Subject: Trump Is Not the Only Grabber Who Must Go
The rats are quickly jumping from the sinking ship of Trump. But not so fast, dear Republican senators and congressmen. Trump may have verbalized his misogyny, sexism and abuse of women into an open microphone, but over the past decades you - YOU - have LEGALIZED it. He may talk of "grabbing" sexual organs, but YOU have created laws that legally grab control over women's bodies. Trump may brag about his power over women; YOU, the Republican legislators (and your backers, the Christian Right and rich businessmen), have made sure women aren't paid the same as men, don't have paid maternity leave, or can't get easy access to birth control.
Trump has been called "disgusting" for his remarks. But you, by actually blocking women's equal rights, you've been rewarded for your misogyny with re-election, campaign cash and future lobbying jobs. You think by disowning Trump now that we, the people, are going be grateful to you. But we know that Trump is only the natural result of a Republican culture that has viciously fought the women's agenda for years. Trump hasn't destroyed your party; he's your end game, the grim reaper from the seeds you have sown, showing up now to preside over your demise. Defeating Trump, or pushing him to drop out, is NOT what will make this right for the majority of us Americans. Like any good doctor, we need to remove the cancer from its source, and that source is you.
Don't try to make Mike Pence out to be some sane, better alternative. This guy was behind the legislation to require women who have an abortion to hold an actual funeral for the fetus! The rest of you have tried to kill Planned Parenthood and many other things that make life a bit easier for women.
Trump bragged to Billy Bush about his "grabbing pussy." But those of you who are the elected officials, who have spent this weekend decrying Trump with your crocodile wails of "shame" and trying to distance yourselves from him, YOU are the ones who've been "grabbing" women the legal way by passing laws that, in effect, assault them. It is an assault to pay women less. It is an assault to block day care for all. It is an assault - and a form of gender apartheid - when only 20% of Congress is women, the majority gender.
As far as I'm concerned, there are 54 Trumps in the US Senate and 237 Trumps in the House. You can't make this look good by removing your endorsement from Trump. Yes, Trump has to go -- but so do you, all of you. Starting with the election on November 8th, we need to show up at the polls and remove as many of you as possible. This abuse of women stops now. I believe that most women and many men are going to determine their vote with this one thought, thanks to you and Trump:
"YOU'RE EITHER WITH WOMEN, OR YOU'RE AGAINST THEM."
And if you're against women, you're over. There's a fourth wave of feminism afoot now -- and you are going to be its first casualties.
Or, as I prefer to see it, its first victory.
Thank you for letting the American public see your true (orange) face. I'm glad you "grabbed" our attention and mobIlized the masses against you. The only thing sweeter than seeing the lot of you gone would be a 50-state sweep for Hillary.
GOP, RIP?
-- Michael Moore
Live simply.
Speak gently.
Love unconditionally.
Sunday, September 18, 2016
WITTY SIGNS
WITTY SIGNS
The Wallingford Chevron, just east of Seattle, has a person (probably a lady) with a really good sense of humor running their sign department.
Friday, July 22, 2016
REMEMBERING GRANDMA GRACE
Thoughts before Bedtime
My mama, whom we all love so dearly, passed away two years ago. My sister, brother, and I speak about her frequently because she played such an important role in forming who we are today. Mama was quiet, loving, protective, and so much more. We always say that we never met anyone who wasn’t drawn to her sweet and caring nature. She was our Little Italian Mama.
I know, I know, some of you are probably thinking that I am idealizing her. Maybe so, but it is the truth about who she was and what she stood for. I suppose I was thinking about her tonight because of a conversation that came up during lunch with the girls. Actually, there were only three of us, but that is all one needs to experience belly laughs interspersed with serious conversation.
One topic centered around the people in our past lives who helped us to overcome some adversity when we had young children. My contribution was about Mama always being there for her three children, whenever, she was needed.
I had several serious health issues back then. We lived in Maryland and it only took one call before Mama was on her way. My dad would drop her off and return home to Pennsylvania. She took over the household without any fuss, bother, or noise. She was a wonderful cook and a divine baker. My family and I were so thankful that Grandma Grace was there for us.
One of the most vivid memories my sister and I have of Mama is of her later years when we got to tuck her into bed. Mama was such a little thing all her life. She stood about five feet tall and never weighed more than 100 pounds. She would crawl into her bed, snuggle under the warm covers (yes, even in the hot Carolina summers) and sigh deeply. Mama would say, “This is the best part of the day.” As we turned off her light, we could hear her whispering her prayers and offering them up to God.
It is time for me to trundle off to my bed. I am auditing an Italian class at the University. I have been studying for tomorrow’s test.
I, too, shall climb into my bed, turn off the light, and repeat Mama’s favorite nighttime words. “ This is the best part of the day.”
Goodnight and be well.
Live simply.
Speak gently.
Love unconditionally.
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Is Selfie Culture Making Our Kids Selfish?
I read the following article this morning and thought I would share it with my readers. Dr. Borba makes some interesting suggestions for helping children become less self centered and more aware and tolerant of others.
One additional suggestion for parents who wish to promote awareness and open-mindness in their children. Read and talk to them when they are born and continue to read and discuss the stories until they are well able to read cognitively for themselves.
Fairy tales, folklore, and fantasy play an important part in a child’s life. Research has shown how important imagination is to a child’s cognitive development. According to psychologist Brunno Bettelheim, (‘Fairy tales [folklore and fantasy] are an important tool for children learning to navigate reality and survive in a world ruled by adults’)
Read more...
http://nepeantutoring.com.au/the-benefits-of-fairy-tales/
http://imaginationsoup.net/2012/02/22/fairy-tales-are-essential-to-childhood/
http://www.education.com/magazine/article/Why_Love_Fairy_Tales/
http://www.getreadytoread.org/early-learning-childhood-basics/early-literacy/helping-children-to-develop-early-literacy-skills-with-dialogic-reading
Is Selfie Culture Making Our Kids Selfish?
June 23, 2016 6:00 am
30
The psychologist and parenting expert Michele Borba says society’s fixation with the selfie is having some unintended consequences. She sees children mimicking not-so-nice behavior in adults and fewer grown-ups calling them out.
In “UnSelfie: Why Empathetic Kids Succeed in Our All-About-Me World,” her 23rd book, Dr. Borba combines scientific research with tales from real-world families and offers concrete tips on how to cultivate kindness.
We talked recently about “selfie syndrome,” ways to flip the focus away from the self and specific activities to build empathy in our children. Here is an edited excerpt of our conversation.
Q. You suggest in the book that technology disrupts kids’ emotional lives. How?
A.You have to have face-to-face connection in order to read emotional cues and experience where the other person is coming from. If the average kid is plugged in – let’s just say what Common Sense Media says is 7.5 hours a day – you’re not having the opportunities to look face-to-face. You can do that in FaceTime. You can do that in Skype. It’s not like you’re throwing the entire thing out. It’s finding ways to make sure there are opportunities where your child won’t lose the critical core skills of not only empathy but connection and social skills. We’ve failed to realize that all of those social skills are learned and they need practice. What we’re not doing is helping our kids practice.
Q. Your book talks about kids and their often-inflated egos. Is this a repercussion of the 1980s self-esteem movement?
A. Yes. Unfortunately, we misinterpreted self-esteem. I wrote five books on self-esteem, but my whole concept of self-esteem was it was layered. Real self-esteem is a balance between two things. One part is feeling worthy and likable. The other part is being capable to handle life – having the skills and competence.
What we did on the self-esteem bandwagon is we did the whole thing of helping the child feel worthy but without the competence; it backfires. Our praise, if we keep focusing on you, after a while, the kid begins to forget there’s others in the world. And the other thing is they become more and more dependent upon us. We kind of bubble-wrapped the child. We helicoptered them and we didn’t teach them the skills to be able to cope. We’re going to have to re-tilt the balance.
Q. Let’s talk discipline. You cite a lot of problems with approaches like spanking and yelling, which are known as detrimental. But what’s wrong with time outs?
A. Time out works if you do it the right way. It’s impossible to discipline wisely or well if you’re in distress or your kid is in distress. It’s better to say, “Let’s separate from each other and let’s calm ourselves down.”
But just sitting alone doesn’t help the kid think through the impact of his actions on others. When your kid comes back out, you need to say, “I’m disappointed in you. I expected better of you because I see you as a caring person. How would you feel if that were you? What are you going to do differently next time?” That’s the piece that research says we may be missing.
Q.
Just what is “selfie syndrome?”
A. Self-absorption kills empathy. Narcissism is “it’s all me.” Empathy is feeling with someone. Empathy is always “we, it’s not me.” The problem is kids are tuning into themselves, and what we need to do is flip the lens and start looking at others. We started to emphasize one side of the report card and we forgot the other side, which is “You’re also a caring human being.” Let’s redefine success so it’s not just a GPA, but it’s also a kid who has heart.
Q. You suggest that some activities, such as chess, reading, watching movies and recess, boost not only academic achievement but increase empathy. Why?
A. Chess is about perspective taking. Kid are not thinking of themselves. They start thinking of others. New research on reading shows that emotionally charged literary fiction like “Charlotte’s Web” or “To Kill a Mockingbird,” where the kid can catch the feelings of the character, makes the child not only smart but nice. Chapter books (such as the “Frog and Toad” series) are short and easy, and more parents are skipping literary fiction in favor of a chapter book because they think it will boost their kid’s vocabulary and reading comprehension. What they’re missing is the rich moral dilemma. Movies and literature are the same. Think of the kind of movie that stirs your heart, like “Dumbo.”
Following are some of Dr. Borba’s tips for how to flip the focus and cultivate kindness.
1 When your children walk out the door, remind them to do one or two kind things each day.
2 Show that you value kindness. Do not just ask, “What you get on your test today?” but, “What kind thing did you do?”
3 Praise your kids for being kind in the moment – when they have earned it: “That was being kind because you offered your toy to your friend.”
4 Make kindness a regular happening. Put a box by your front door for gently used items and when it fills up, drop it off together for a needy family.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/is-selfie-culture-making-our-kids-selfish/?emc=eta1
As always,
Grandma Meg
Live simply.
Speak gently.
Love unconditionally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)