Misogyny and Sexism in the News

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Toughy

okie dokie here ya go...........

'certainly many/most of the radical feminists I have encountered think so'. What I mean when I say 'radical feminist' is the anti-porn, no penetrative sex, no adornment (make-up etc), no males over 5 yrs old, separatist lesbian kind of feminist.

I stand by the above. I don't think (as it is now written) it over-generalizes or stereotypes radical feminism as I have defined it.

I don't think clarifying what I said is 'toning it down'. I do get what you mean about the original statement, but if you still think that after clarification..............shrug.......we will just have to disagree

--------------------

Til now I had never run across anyone who claimed 'radical feminist' who did not fit the above description. Certainly, one can say it is a radical idea that the patriarchy is the root of oppression of women and 'radical feminism' as a big picture concept is fitting. I was thinking that within self identified feminists the ones that are radical are those who are separatist, anti-porn, sex negative, no penetration sexually, no males over 5 yrs old, etc.....we all know who I am talking about....

I did a bit of research and came across this basic definition of 'radical feminism' (I took Wiki's cuz they all say about the same thing):

Radical feminism is a current theoretical perspective within feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on an assumption that male supremacy[1] oppresses women. Radical feminism aims to challenge and overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and oppression of women and calls for a radical reordering of society.[1]

Wiki defines feminism as:

Feminism is a collection of movements aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women.[1][2] In addition, feminism seeks to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist is a "person whose beliefs and behavior are based on feminism."[3]



I personally don't think it's a radical idea that the patriarchy is the root of oppression and the 'isms' in the world. Nor do I believe it's radical to think gender roles are harmful and we need to re-order society. I thought that was just part of plain old garden variety feminist thought.

Seems to me the reason we need feminism is the patriarchy so I have trouble understanding why that is defined as radical.

just nit-picking over semantics in some ways, I guess....

Your mileage may vary.......

Toughy, I am following you now.

Helps to keep the historical context in sight. We are both of the same generation and it was an entirely different world for women back then. Stuff that is taken for granted now, is stuff we had to fight for then.

Back then, many of the theories and thinking of feminists were considered radical for the times. By todays standards, the theories and thinking are less unusual, more mainstream, less radical in nature. Evolution is a wonderful thing.

And the extent of ones radicalism may have been expressed in any number of ways in an effort to empower oneself and women as a whole by rejecting various patriarchal ways as various factions saw fit.

My memory banks are fuzzy these days. But, it does seem plausible that there were anti-porn sentiments because porn was seen as exploitive of women.

Anti-penetration is ringing a distant bell. Then again, back then, even some unradical lesbians were singing an anti-pentration theme cuz it was unlesbian.

I dont remember an anti-sex thing but I do remember an anti sex with men thing i.e. dont sleep with your oppressor because it clouded your judgement about your oppression kind of thing.

I have no clue why there was a male cut off after age 5. Im not a kid person. Do boys change radically at 6 or something?

In our own individual evolutions, I suspect we could track the changes in our own thinking, perspectives, preferences, definitions. Wish I could remember that far back.

[aishah]

http://preventconnect.org/2012/01/ra...ing-in-the-us/

Sexual violence is a pervasive public health problem in the United States. In December 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey. Throughout the country, headlines of local and national papers described that rape is more common than previously thought.

Today an article published in on Significance Magazine’s web site, a publication of the American Statistical Association and Royal Statistical Society, compared these rates to those of smoking – 18.3% of women over 18 reported being sexual assaulted in their lifetime while 17.4% of women reported smoking. Let consider this as we set health priorities.

Just as in smoking prevention, preventing sexual violence before it happens in the first place is crucial. NISVS demonstrated that sexual violence often first happen when peopel are young, thus early prevention efforts are vital.

For more information on NISVS go to CDC’s NISVS page. You can also find materials on PreventConnect, VawNet’s NISVS Resource Page and the NSVRC’s NISVS Page.

[Soon]

Violence Against Women Act Funding Request Rejected By GOP

[aishah]

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/05/are_...G_hik.facebook

great article about women in the corporate workplace.

[Soon]

Jay Townsend, GOP Spokesman: 'Let's Hurl Some Acid At Those Female Democratic Senators'

[DapperButch]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...6pLid%3D166825

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by DapperButch

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...6pLid%3D166825

As usual, don't read the comments unless you want to lose some sleep. I'll take my own advice next time.

[Kobi]

CAIRO (AP) — A mob of hundreds of men assaulted women holding a march demanding an end to sexual harassment Friday, with the attackers overwhelming the male guardians and groping and molesting several of the female marchers in Cairo's Tahrir Square.

From the ferocity of the assault, some of the victims said it appeared to have been an organized attempt to drive women out of demonstrations and trample on the pro-democracy protest movement.

The attack follows smaller scale assaults on women this week in Tahrir, the epicenter of the uprising that forced Hosni Mubarak to step down last year. Thousands have been gathering in the square this week in protests over a variety of issues — mainly over worries that presidential elections this month will secure the continued rule by elements of Mubarak's regime backed by the ruling military.

Earlier in the week, an Associated Press reporter witnessed around 200 men assault a woman who eventually fainted before men trying to help could reach her.

Friday's march was called to demand an end to sexual assaults. Around 50 women participated, surrounded by a larger group of male supporters who joined to hands to form a protective ring around them. The protesters carried posters saying, "The people want to cut the hand of the sexual harasser," and chanted, "The Egyptian girl says it loudly, harassment is barbaric."

After the marchers entered a crowded corner of the square, a group of men waded into the women, heckling them and groping them. The male supporters tried to fend them off, and it turned into a melee involving a mob of hundreds.

The marchers tried to flee while the attackers chased them and male supporters tried to protect them. But the attackers persisted, cornering several women against a metal sidewalk railing, including an Associated Press reporter, shoving their hands down their clothes and trying to grab their bags. The male supporters fought back, swinging belts and fists and throwing water.

Eventually, the women were able to reach refuge in a nearby building with the mob still outside until they finally got out to safety.

"After what I saw and heard today. I am furious at so many things. Why beat a girl and strip her off? Why?" wrote Sally Zohney, one of the organizers of the event on Twitter.

The persistence of the attack raised the belief of many that it was intentional, though who orchestrated it was unclear.

Mariam Abdel-Shahid, a 25 year-old cinema student who took part in the march, said "sexual harassment will only take us backward."

"This is pressure on the woman to return home," she said.

Ahmed Mansour, a 22 year-old male medical student who took part in the march, said there are "people here trying to abuse the large number of women protesters who feel safe and secure. Some people think it is targeted to make women hate coming here."

"I am here to take a position and to object to this obscene act in society," he said.

Assaults on women Tahrir have been a demoralizing turn for Egypt's protest movement.

During the 18-day uprising against Mubarak last year, women say they briefly experienced a "new Egypt," with none of the harassment that is common in Cairo's streets taking place in Tahrir. Women participated in the anti-Mubarak uprising as leading activists, protesters, medics and even fighters to ward off attacks by security agents or affiliated thugs. They have continued the role during the frequent protests over the past 15 months against the military, which took power after Mubarak's fall on Feb. 11, 2011.

But women have also been targeted, both by mobs and by military and security forces in crackdowns, a practice commonly used by Mubarak security against protesters. Lara Logan, a U.S. correspondent for CBS television, was sexually assaulted by a frenzied mob in Tahrir on the day Mubarak stepped down, when hundreds of thousands of Egyptians came to the square to celebrate.

In a defining image of the post-Mubarak state violence against women, troops dispersing a December protest in Tahrir were captured on video stripping a woman's top off down to her blue bra and stomping with their boots on her chest, as other troops pulled her by the arms across the ground.

That incident prompted an unprecedented march by some 10,000 women through central Cairo in December demanding Egypt's ruling military step down in a show of outrage

In contrast, the small size of Friday's march could reflect the vulnerability and insecurity many feel in the square, which was packed with thousands of mostly young men by nightfall Friday. Twenty rights groups signed on to support the stand and hundreds more vowed to take part, according to the Facebook page where organizers publicized the event, but only around 50 women participated.

Sexual harassment of women, including against those who wear the Islamic headscarf or even cover their face, is common in the streets of Cairo. A 2008 report by the Egyptian Center for Women's Rights says two-thirds of women in Egypt experienced sexual harassment on a daily basis. A string of mass assaults on women in 2006 during the Muslim feast following the holy month of Ramadan prompted police to increase the number of patrols to combat it but legislation providing punishment was never passed.

After Friday's attack, many were already calling for another, much larger stand in the square against such assaults.

Another participant in Friday's march, Ahmed Hawary, said a close female friend of his was attacked by a mob of men in Tahrir Square in January. She was rushed off in an ambulance, which was the only way to get her out, he said. After suffering from a nervous breakdown, she left Cairo altogether to work elsewhere in Egypt.

"Women activists are at the core of the revolution," Hawary said. "They are the courage of this movement. If you break them, you break the spirit of the revolution."

http://news.yahoo.com/mob-attacks-wo...212911011.html

[Kobi]

ALBANY, N.Y.—A family who loses a loved one in New York to domestic violence will no longer face the additional anger and heartache of seeing a spouse who is suspected of murder controlling the victim's burial.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo and legislative leaders said Monday they have agreed on legislation that would end the power of abusive spouses to dictate what happens to the bodies of the wives or husbands they're accused of killing.

The package is expected to easily pass the Senate and Assembly by June 21, the end of the Legislature's regular session

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...--+Latest+news

[Soon]

Violence Against Women Disguised as ‘Fashion’

link to the photos in article

[Kobi]

Boasting charming rides and themed attractions, the Merry-Land Resort Theme Park is a bit like Southern China’s answer to Disneyland — except for the hordes of miniskirt-wearing women being hosed down by their fellow patrons.

The miniskirts are the product of a summer marketing campaign aimed at attracting more visitors. The park offers a half-price discount to all women wearing skirts shorter than 38 inches—and it takes the gimmick very seriously: Staff members wait at the park entrance armed with rulers and anything other than a miniskirt (like a short dress or hot pants) need not apply.

“The stipulation aims to encourage female visitors to showcase their beauty in summer,” the park’s deputy manager, Li Wenxing, told Shanghai Daily. The park also encourages patrons to throw water on the mini-skirted women, as part of what it calls a summer “water splashing festival.”

Li says that visitor numbers have soared since the campaign was implemented. But nearby residents aren’t too happy about the ploy, as some believe that the campaign is encouraging women to “behave erotically” in public.


Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/07/17/...#ixzz211HAV7UM

[DMW]

They should let the women that wear the miniskirts in for free.
Maybe that makes me a mysogynist.
But damn. Women make people happy. And sex sells.

This is the world. Women move the world around.
The women should now refuse to go into the park unless it is free.
The men will complain that the miniskirt women are gone
and the women will get in for free.

The water splashing...that doesn't seem so nice. I don't like the water splashing
idea.
What about wet t-shirt contests? here in the u.s. or wherever?

See, i believe that women should get paid for their service.
Prostitution should be legalized so that the woman gets all of the income and
have health care.

Other than the splashing...i don't think this is that big of a deal.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by DMW

They should let the women that wear the miniskirts in for free.
Maybe that makes me a mysogynist.
But damn. Women make people happy. And sex sells.

This is the world. Women move the world around.
The women should now refuse to go into the park unless it is free.
The men will complain that the miniskirt women are gone
and the women will get in for free.

The water splashing...that doesn't seem so nice. I don't like the water splashing
idea.
What about wet t-shirt contests? here in the u.s. or wherever?

See, i believe that women should get paid for their service.
Prostitution should be legalized so that the woman gets all of the income and
have health care.

Other than the splashing...i don't think this is that big of a deal.

DMW,

This is making me twitch and not in a good way. I'm not sure I even understand what you are trying to say. May I ask you to clarify what you mean here?

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by DMW

They should let the women that wear the miniskirts in for free.
Maybe that makes me a mysogynist.
But damn. Women make people happy. And sex sells.

This is the world. Women move the world around.
The women should now refuse to go into the park unless it is free.
The men will complain that the miniskirt women are gone
and the women will get in for free.

The water splashing...that doesn't seem so nice. I don't like the water splashing
idea.
What about wet t-shirt contests? here in the u.s. or wherever?

See, i believe that women should get paid for their service.
Prostitution should be legalized so that the woman gets all of the income and
have health care.

Other than the splashing...i don't think this is that big of a deal.

Troll alert. Post reported.

[Admin]

Originally Posted by DMW

They should let the women that wear the miniskirts in for free.
Maybe that makes me a mysogynist.
But damn. Women make people happy. And sex sells.

This is the world. Women move the world around.
The women should now refuse to go into the park unless it is free.
The men will complain that the miniskirt women are gone
and the women will get in for free.

The water splashing...that doesn't seem so nice. I don't like the water splashing
idea.
What about wet t-shirt contests? here in the u.s. or wherever?

See, i believe that women should get paid for their service.
Prostitution should be legalized so that the woman gets all of the income and
have health care.

Other than the splashing...i don't think this is that big of a deal.

DMW-

I've received multiple reports about this post.

I think I understand you as saying that there is merit behind this theme park wanting to use women as their "marketing tool".

To answer your question, it *is* misogyny to treat women as "things" rather than people. That goes for marketing tools, non-consensual class-targeted ploys for "free" stuff, and any situation that puts a woman in a position of having her body used to "lure" people to a theme park.

I need you to understand that statements like "women make people happy" in this context feels a lot like valuing a woman as a "thing" rather than an individual human being.

Because puppies make people happy. And cars. And new shoes.

Please try to be mindful that this site is not only woman-positive but woman-honoring. We really want to dismantle socialized misogyny, rape culture, and patriarchal expectations of women on this site. I hope you'll help be part of that solution.

Thanks!
Angie/Admin/Medusa

[JustJo]

Absolutely agreeing with what Admin posted here, but also....this is one of those situations that makes my head spin around and my eyes bulge out, because the people who are playing along and enabling this misogynistic, archaic bullshit...are women!

Until women stop flocking to this kind of thing and playing along, how do we get the rest of society to feel any differently?

Serious question.

The article says visitor numbers have soared since implementing this policy. Those visitors aren't just those who come to oogle, but also the women wearing the mini-skirts and allowing themselves to have water thrown on themselves.

WTF.

People drive me crazy sometimes.

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by JustJo

Absolutely agreeing with what Admin posted here, but also....this is one of those situations that makes my head spin around and my eyes bulge out, because the people who are playing along and enabling this misogynistic, archaic bullshit...are women!

Until women stop flocking to this kind of thing and playing along, how do we get the rest of society to feel any differently?

Serious question.

The article says visitor numbers have soared since implementing this policy. Those visitors aren't just those who come to oogle, but also the women wearing the mini-skirts and allowing themselves to have water thrown on themselves.

WTF.

People drive me crazy sometimes.

I can totally see the sentiment behind this and sometimes feel the same way. At the same time, I feel like its so difficult for people to break free of what's been hammered into them since birth.

It's a complicated situation, especially in a world where women's liberation is still being heavily associated with female sexual objectification in the mainstream. Like the whole "Real Housewives of wherever," who reflect this current mentality of "women have achieved equality" (which they have not), "society is no longer patriarchal" (which it is) and so women need to reclaim their sexuality (which I totally support...female sexuality is still constantly shamed in our societies, and labeled in cis-male-centric terms) by promoting female dependence upon cissexed hetero men for financial stability and validation as human beings (hello, what year is this, people?).

So yes, obviously women participating in these kinds of publicity stunts that use female objectification to make money need to start seeing that reality. I was reading in the newspaper maybe a month ago about a drunk driving ad in Nova Scotia, where the mascot for the ad was an animated woman, obviously very sexualised stereotypical hetero "ideal." The organisation put up signs informing drivers that "she doesn't go for drunk drivers" and other slogans, obviously targeting a hetero male population. Again, sad when you use sexual objectification to tell men not to drink and drive. And what does that say about their approach to drunk driving? Women drive drunk as well, yet how often do you see ads like this targeting women? Stereotypes abound. Yes, women need to wake up and see this as not "just the way things are," but at the same time I think its difficult...when you're told your entire life that this is what is appropriate, "natural," your station in society.

So the question then becomes, how does one promote real, inclusive feminism in the mainstream media, in a society based on capitalist ideals that uses the sexual objectification of women to sell products, ideas, services, or even safe driving? And though this instance in particular occurred in China, we cannot, for a second, maintain that China is not also a heavily capitalist nation. In societies like this that promote traditional cissexed hetero male ideas of "success," those who don't fit the bill will always be the ones used by those in power to make a quick buck.

Sometimes its just overwhelming as far as where to even start

[Kobi]

Jo, Ender, you both raise some interesting points. Is tricky stuff with no easy answers.

Feminism, misogyny, sexism, exploitation, objectification are not one size fits all in every situation kind of thing. The definitions, interpretations, perspectives, are as individual as our queer ids can be.

In one way it is frustrating to see the same institutional patriarchial crap as alive and well today as it was in 1973 when Shirley Chisholm said...the emotional, sexual, and psychological stereotyping of females begins when the doctor says, 'It's a girl'."

In another way, we as women have choices now that we didnt have way back then. We have a right to these choices as well as the implications and consequences of them.

The most difficult for me to deal with is the sometimes fine line between what are manifestations of internalized patriarchal bullshit versus what is deliberate, calculated, informed individual choice.

The second most difficult is having the negative stuff being done to women, out there, whether it be in the media, in the workplace, in relationships, in economics, in parenting etc. being replicated within our own community. That just really bites.

I dont have any answers. I just never expected to be dealing with the same stuff and more in my 50's as I did in my 20's. It is discouraging and aggravating and tiring to have to address this over and over and over again.

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Jo, Ender, you both raise some interesting points. Is tricky stuff with no easy answers.

Feminism, misogyny, sexism, exploitation, objectification are not one size fits all in every situation kind of thing. The definitions, interpretations, perspectives, are as individual as our queer ids can be.

In one way it is frustrating to see the same institutional patriarchial crap as alive and well today as it was in 1973 when Shirley Chisholm said...the emotional, sexual, and psychological stereotyping of females begins when the doctor says, 'It's a girl'."

In another way, we as women have choices now that we didnt have way back then. We have a right to these choices as well as the implications and consequences of them.

The most difficult for me to deal with is the sometimes fine line between what are manifestations of internalized patriarchal bullshit versus what is deliberate, calculated, informed individual choice.

The second most difficult is having the negative stuff being done to women, out there, whether it be in the media, in the workplace, in relationships, in economics, in parenting etc. being replicated within our own community. That just really bites.

I dont have any answers. I just never expected to be dealing with the same stuff and more in my 50's as I did in my 20's. It is discouraging and aggravating and tiring to have to address this over and over and over again.

It's frustrating. Society constantly goes through these phases of becoming more progressive before sending people back 50 years.

I'm not sure it really is a deliberate, calculated, informed choice. How informed is it? Yes, everyone has a right to a choice, but at the same time we can't ignore the social realities that inform that choice. In many ways this parallels the niqab debate in many Western nations...claiming that women have the "choice" and that they shouldn't be permitted to wear the niqab in places like schools and work places. So yes, the woman might have a "choice," but the choice is to defy your upbringing, your family, your culture as you were raised to understand it or be shunned from the rest of society (education, jobs etc.) While perhaps less extreme, the "choice" can be similar for many women in various societies. You are brought up to see yourself a certain way...and if you do something radical according to your culture...no longer subscribe to gendered norms or sexual norms (not talking necessarily about queer/trans community here) you still might have much to lose, if not what little privilege conformity gives you in society.

And what if you don't even question it?

At what point is that "choice" not so much a choice as a reaction to social programming...as is everything. We are all socially programmed and no choice we make is ever divorced from that. It just depends on whether we challenge it or conform to it.

I believe we all should have a right to make a choice except in the instances where it brings direct harm to other human beings. Yet in many respects these choices, as extensions of how these behaviours will affect how these women interact with other generations of women (namely younger women and girls), do do damage.

And if these choices are extensions of upbringing and social expectations, how do societies provide room for them while also making sure that future generations of children are not brought into such a world of gendered social expectations or into a world where it is deemed "the way things are" to sexually objectify half the population based on the sex they were assigned at birth. Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men.

All I know is the world is seriously too fucked up

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by EnderD_503

It's frustrating. Society constantly goes through these phases of becoming more progressive before sending people back 50 years.

I'm not sure it really is a deliberate, calculated, informed choice. How informed is it? Yes, everyone has a right to a choice, but at the same time we can't ignore the social realities that inform that choice. In many ways this parallels the niqab debate in many Western nations...claiming that women have the "choice" and that they shouldn't be permitted to wear the niqab in places like schools and work places. So yes, the woman might have a "choice," but the choice is to defy your upbringing, your family, your culture as you were raised to understand it or be shunned from the rest of society (education, jobs etc.) While perhaps less extreme, the "choice" can be similar for many women in various societies. You are brought up to see yourself a certain way...and if you do something radical according to your culture...no longer subscribe to gendered norms or sexual norms (not talking necessarily about queer/trans community here) you still might have much to lose, if not what little privilege conformity gives you in society.

And what if you don't even question it?

At what point is that "choice" not so much a choice as a reaction to social programming...as is everything. We are all socially programmed and no choice we make is ever divorced from that. It just depends on whether we challenge it or conform to it.

I believe we all should have a right to make a choice except in the instances where it brings direct harm to other human beings. Yet in many respects these choices, as extensions of how these behaviours will affect how these women interact with other generations of women (namely younger women and girls), do do damage.

And if these choices are extensions of upbringing and social expectations, how do societies provide room for them while also making sure that future generations of children are not brought into such a world of gendered social expectations or into a world where it is deemed "the way things are" to sexually objectify half the population based on the sex they were assigned at birth. Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men.

All I know is the world is seriously too fucked up

I agree with you. We seem to share a common paradigm. Your words are my words. Your thoughts are my thoughts. Except when they arent. Sometimes, I see things differently when my values, morals, paradigm and life conflict in ways I dont expect. I have to adjust, adapt, make choices, change perspectives etc.

There is a distinct difference, it seems, between theory and real life. Lots of things work in theory. They dont always work in real life or maybe they dont work in quite the way we expect or maybe they work in various ways for ways people at various times. Is confusing stuff.

The "choice" I was referring to involves individual perspective which may be unknown or just plain foreign to me. Take any act as an example. I might see it as sexist and misogynistic. Someone else might see the partiarchy lurking in it but feel the act was an adaptation to conditions. Someone else might not even acknowledge the patriarchy paradigm, thus they see an act as what is expected or their role in life period and they are very comfortable with that. Someone else might see the patriarchy but their behavior is more geared to exploiting the exploitation for their own benefit. Someone else might see something totally different. Thats diversity.

Wish it was simplier but it isnt. The mere fact something is observed will change its properties. That is scientific fact. Funny thing this life can be.

You also said - "Where they might have more options to make choices that aren't framed around the ingrained need to focus those choices on the desires of cissexed hetero men."

We are of the same thinking and paradigm yet I dont limit my perspective to "the desires of cissexed hetero men". To me, it is much broader. It is the appearance or even just the suggestion of masculinity. Social programming runs deep, and there are perks and privileges all along the spectum of real and perceived masculinity.

Being a woman, this never occured to me until I began playing around with how best to word my id so I didnt have to keep explaining it. When I used butch or lesbutchian, I was treated differently. People related to me differently. They flirted with me differently. They "honored" my butchness in ways that were unfamiliar and uncomfortable to me because I am not male id. If I addressed something female i.e. pms, what I said could be miscontrued as a sexist comment rather than a shared female experience - because I wasnt seen as a female. It was a very weird yet enlightening kind of experience.

Of course, now, I just use lesbian and woman. Again, I am treated differently albeit in more familiar and comfortable ways. I am also mistaken for a femme more and this is ok cuz at least I am being seen as a female. And, I dont get as many perks and privileges as I used to. On the other hand, I dont get the feeling people are checking out my crotch anymore either.

Social programming works both ways tho. A femme can say something to me and I dont think twice about it. A male id person can say the exact same thing using the exact words and I want to smack him/hym upside the head. Tricky stuff this programming.

The older I get, the more I appreciate how life teaches us some interesting lessons. It is a journey of creativity not a destination. We are works in progress not a final product. In a lot of ways, it seems to me like we are making it up as we go. Sometimes we do good. Sometimes we dont. Sometimes we do good by accident not intent. Sometimes good intent turns into a unforseen fiasco.

I used to have a lot of answers. Now I have a lot more questions cuz nothing and no one is ever as simple as I would like it or them to be. The older I get, the clearer this becomes.