Stay Tuned!

Tomorrow's topic will be South Carolina. . .we are not idiots contrary to popular belief. . .if you have an opinion, please comment and I will try to address it in tomorrow's blog.

Thanks for stopping in.

"Haunting" Memories

It's Hallowed Eve eve. Ooohhhh ha ha. Ghosts and goblins; pumpkins and apples; candy and costumes; tricks and treats.

Earlier darkness falls upon the cooler, crisper evening. Fall leaves crunch below your feet as you wander the streets and alleys knocking on doors of strangers demanding payment of food for their freedom from pranks.

We send our children out into the darkness, in disguise, to collect sugar laden treats that will keep them up into the wee hours of the morning. Who came up with this idea?

Halloween has its origins in the ancient Celtic festival of Sahmahin. The festival of Samhain celebrated the end of the "lighter half" of the year and the beginning of the "darker half" of the year. The Celts believed that this seasonal change thinned the border between this world and that of the Otherworld; allowing spirits, both good and bad, to pass easily from one to another. To avoid the "evil" spirits that might present themselves, people took to dressing as these spirits to avoid harm and scare them off.

As it was also time for the harvest, the Celts would take stock of food and livestock to store for winter. Thus, the search for "treats".

Halloween, clad in its colors of orange and black, costumes and disguises, has many traditional symbols: bonfires, Jack O'Lanterns, and candy apples.

The bonfires provided a symbolism of cleansing. The bones of the slaughtered livestock were tossed into the "bonefires". The hearth fires of the homes were extinguished and relit from the flames of the communal fire; providing a continuity for the approaching winter. In some of the clans, two bonfires were built side by side and the people and their livestock would pass through as a cleansing ritual.

The Jack O'Lantern actually began as a turnip. It became a pumpkin only in North America where the pumpkin was more abundant in late October (and easier to carve) than the turnip or rutabaga. The Irish legend goes that there lived a greedy, gambling, hard drinking farmer named Stingy Jack. Jack tricked the devil into climbing into a tree and then trapped him there by carving a cross on the tree. The devil took his revenge by cursing Jack to wander the earth forever, at night, with only a light in his head.

Candy apples and bobbing for apples were also part of the evolution of Halloween in North America. The festival came in the wake of the apple harvest. And the candied part was a result of the nuts and syrup also collected at this time of year.

Growing up in South Florida, my Halloween memories don't include those crisp, cooler evenings. More often than not, it was damp, rainy evening. I remember perspiring under the masks and had them off early in the search for treats. I remember being a sailor girl, a princess, a witch and a hobo. Mother didn't use too much of her creativity in developing my Halloween persona. I believe that came because I was the youngest of the six kids she raised.

As an adult, I have taken the guise of Cruella D'Ville, a very wicked witch who smoked a cigar, Ginger from Gilligan's Island, Morticia from the Adams' Family and Tina Turner (most people thought I was Ron Wood in drag). I love the thought of developing a unique costume; I just don't seem to get around to it in time for Halloween.

It's like all the other holidays. . .it just sneaks up on me.

Happy Hauntings and be safe out there.

866 American Lives Lost

It is said that in peace, children bury their parents; in war, parents bury their children.

American deaths and Afghanistan have weighed heavily on my mind these past few days. Claims of the "deadliest month" has become a repetitive headline; each month. There have been 866 American lives lost since the 2001 invasion; 53 deaths in October; and, President Obama met 18 fallen American personnel in a midnight visit to Dover Air Force Base last evening.

In a cold and misty night, the President and his entourage, quietly saluted the return of the flag-draped coffins in what the military calls "a dignified transfer." A Chaplin raises his hands in prayer as the "cases" exit the "precious" cargo plane. It is only recently, that the American public is once again allowed to see the return of these fallen victims of war. The Bush Administration had restricted the media coverage of these "transfers" since the onset of the Iraqi and Afghan invasions. Some say to give privacy to the soldiers' families; others say it was to mask the casualty count that these wars have produced.

I came of age during the war in Viet Nam; or the conflict as it was called. I remember the news coverage each evening of the bloody battles and knew young men that lost their lives in the "conflict." I knew and know many men that live "lost lives" because of that "conflict."

While President Obama has inherited these wars, the pundits proclaim that it will "define his presidency." As he, and his military advisers, ponder the deployment of yet more Americans into Afghanistan, he is being called "overly cautious and indecisive." I am having memories of Lyndon B. Johnson and his decisions to escalate American presence in Southeast Asia; in these lands where a civil war threatened the freedom of many. Viet Nam, sadly, defined the Johnson Administration too.

If we learned nothing else from the Viet Nam tragedy, we should have learned that you can not fight for someone else's freedom. It is not our fight. Freedom is something for which each individual must make a sacrifice. Do we, or can we, really "give" freedom? Do we all share the same definition of "freedom"? We went to the Middle East to search and destroy the Taliban and Bin Laden. We went there for selfish purposes and now claim we are there to protect the freedom of the people.

Whatever happened to good, old fashioned covert operations? If Bin Laden, one man, was our mission, why have we sent so many? Saddam is gone, why are we still there? Are we really there to "root out evil" and "crush injustice" or are we on a proselytizing mission to assimilate western culture into an ancient civilization? Did we not learn from the Crusades?

H.G. Wells said, "If we do not end war, war will end us." It is not my wish for our children.

Post Career Occupation

With the economy and job market in its spiral, not knowing if it's going back up or down, I am rethinking my "retirement plan."

After spending thirty plus years building a career and a bank account, I woke up one morning to find them both gone. Well, not completely; the memory lingers. But the substance of both is fading away. I have spent these many years "living to work". I was my career. I never thought about retirement. I never imagined myself not working; at something. And, the work didn't necessarily mean making money.

I was a "cheap date". My employers really did get more than they were paying for. I know that now and I am perfectly fine with that. I am willing to do the same again, in my retirement.

That's right - retirement. I contend that the "new retirement" is "working to live" and not the other way around. Since I have to keep working through, into and around retirement (until that final retirement we call death), I am going to do something that I love and that I love everyday. It will be a job; not a career; it will be my avocation; it will be fun and fulfilling.

It will be something I can be passionate about while I'm doing it, but not so consuming that I can't leave it at the door. It will be something that will provide me with a steady income, but not bonuses upon bonuses that will keep me tethered to the office. It will be something that gives me repletion, but not something that sucks the life out of me. In my retirement, the company store no longer owns my soul.

Do you know how my friend Webster defines retirement? Being retired: withdrawing from work or business because of advanced age; drawing back from contact with others; being in a place of privacy or seclusion; to withdraw from use. As any "old geezer" would say: poppycock! That was never the plan!


The "retirement plan" included increased time for leisure activities with family and friends; meeting new people; seeing new places; taking up art or music and reading that stack of books. Does that sound like being withdrawn from use? There's work to be done and we have the experience and knowledge to do it.

I am not entering retirement any time soon. I am entering my "post career occupation".

Embrace Your "Freakism"

"Flying the freak flag!" That's what my niece, Veronica, calls it when she reacts (read over-reacts) to a situation. I laugh. I know that the "freak flag" is part of a family tradition.

We are a passionate, opinionated and emotional lot. Chaos follows us. Panic envelops us. Laughter consumes us. We are consummate communicators - we verbalize everything. Those behaviors make some people very uncomfortable. We're sorry, we can't help it; we have learned to embrace our "freakism". And we proudly "fly the freak flag."

We don't think we're freaks at all. We find the humor in our reaction to life's little and huge obstacles alike. We just don't know how to contain the "freakism" before it explodes. Our arms begin waving, our feet may stomp and the words spill from our mouths.

Choruses of "what the hell" and "you got to be f**king kidding me" can be heard quite frequently. Paul Tillich said, "astonishment is the root of philosophy." We're just a bunch of modern day philosophers. We are always astonished by what people say and do, but we are never amazed. We're astonished by what we do and say too. We spend time a lot of time trying to figure it all out. And then, we roll our eyes, throw up our hands and chuckle - maybe we're just a bunch of big freaks?

Can you believe what I said? Did you see what I did? I lost it, didn't I? I'm such a freak! And I come from a long line of freaks.

Freakism is a learned behavior. It is animated and often loud and boisterous. It is raw emotion. When confronted by "freakism", many people view it as anger - sometimes insanity. It is neither. It is a reaction to perceived injustice, prejudice or plain stupidity. It is intolerant to lack of thought and logic.

Methinks we all have a bit of the "freak" within. Some are highly repressed. I suggest that letting the freak out every now and then is healthy and liberating.

Embrace the freak, just don't get it wet or feed it after midnight - remember what happen to the Gremlins.

A Woman's Nation - Divided

The posts over the last couple days addressing the Shriver Report on A Woman's Nation has drawn a number of diverse comments (primarily on my Facebook page). It concerns me, because it is evidence that there is still a huge divide on women's issues; and the divide is between the women.

I'm not sure if the divide centers on women with children and women without children or women with careers and women without careers or single woman and married woman. Both groups on each issue need each other's support. Each of us have made choices in our lives and each of us should address those choices with responsibility and acceptance.

The Women's Movement provided us all with choice. If it wasn't for the movement, many of us would not have had the opportunity to build our careers. Had we made the choice not to marry and not to have children before the movement, we would have been confined to pink collar jobs and low wages; literally eating cat food in our old age.

The Women's Movement sanctioned women with children working out of the home. It gave increased opportunity to single mothers to provide for their children. Mothers, married and single, have every opportunity to pursue education, career and relationships because of the movement. The children are no longer an excuse not to do something.

Some of us may believe that if you choose to have a child, that you should stay home and raise the child. Some women do not have that choice. Some of us believe that woman who pursue careers, without children are selfish. These are the judgements that create the divide.

Do not judge unless you walk in those shoes. We were given choices, but the choice we make are still a result of our personalities and value system. The cornerstone of the foundation of the movement was "acceptance"; acceptance of choices to fulfill our dreams.

Some women raise three children on their own, work full-time, volunteer in their community, go to the gym regularly and spend quality time with family and friends. That full schedule may be too much for other woman. Some women are married with children, stay home and keep house; and that is a full enough schedule for them. Both are right. Both made a choice.

We should not feel the need to make excuses for why we do or don't do more or less in our lives. You answer only to yourself.

We cry for diversity in the workplace, in education and within political policy. Why can't we achieve diversity and acceptance within our own gender? No more excuses. Just know you have choices thanks to many women before you.

A Woman's Nation - Part Deux

A Woman's Nation: the story of my life. I read more of the Shriver Report last night. And then I sent it to all of my nieces and young women friends. Yesterday, I said it was "old news". It is old news to me, but a "must read" for women 45 and younger; and for their fathers, brothers, husbands and sons.

Maria Shriver opens her chapter with great affection and reverence to the achievements of her mother, Eunice Shriver. Eunice was a great role model for many women. It was often said that "had Eunice been a man, she would have been President." Eunice had the "luxury" of being "liberated" and took the responsibility of being a role model very seriously. It was appropriate for Shriver to laud her mother in the opening paragraphs of this report.

One of the driving forces of the report/study undertaking was the sentiment that women did not have "a place to connect". Between the lines, that reads as the lack of "a good ole boy club." I submit that this is true for the fact that in the early days of achieving success, many of us saw each other as the "enemy". Instead of finding our role as successful women, we took the role of "mini-men". We wanted to be accepted as "one of the boys" and believed there was a very finite space for "mini-men" at the table. Maybe that was because we didn't have access to team sports as we grew up; we were trained to compete for the attentions of men and that very much got in our way as we left the confines of our father's and husband's homes.

"They don't speak with one voice and they don't have just ONE issue." Well said.

During John F. Kennedy's presidency, he charted the Commission on the Status of Women. The purpose of the commission was to reveal how the nation could best achieve "practical equality" with men educationally, economically and politically. Practical equality? Practical: dealing realistically and sensibly with everyday activities; that is in practice whether or not in theory, belief, value or law. There was a disguised contempt is that treatise.

In the Commission's final report, released in 1963, Margaret Mead, co-editor, wrote, "The climate of opinion is turning against the idea that homemaking is the only form of feminine achievement." It was no longer practical.

Hence the "battle of the sexes" began. Those of us who were of age in the 70s took to the schools, the workplace and the political forums. We came with a different perspective, with different ideas, but were forced to assimilate into the men's accepted practices. We went undercover, waiting for the time we could truly speak our voice. Nearly fifty years later, we are still seeking "one voice". Can we achieve "one voice" when we have so many issues to address?

The Shriver Report provides findings on TEN issues: economy, government, immigrants, health, education, business, faith, media, men and marriage. All of these issues affect men as well, just in different ways.

Much attention is given to the "sandwich generation". The generation that is finding itself responsible, not only, for the caring of its children, but the the caring and support of aging parents. Look around and you will find that the duties of care taking are more often thrust upon the women. By choice or by necessity, women find themselves attending to the needs of the generations before them and following them; and the men with them. Agreed that there are many men who have stepped up to the plate to assist and provide. However, have you ever attended a caregivers support group? Mostly women.

In the report it says that the battle of the sexes is now "the negotiation between the sexes." That is a huge step and I agree that we do sit down at the table to discuss who will pay what bill, who will take the kids to school, who will address locating an appropriate facility for Mom when the time comes.

However, "we are all a bit disoriented", in this constantly changing landscape - economy, health care, climate change. Hence I return to the comment I made yesterday: these are not just women's issues, these are "people issues".

We are genetically coded to be aware of the "differences" in each other; it is some sort of survival mechanism. Isn't there some"code" we can use to to collectively find one voice? It is not women versus men; it is not black versus white versus brown versus yellow; it is not Christian versus Jew versus Muslim.

For all practical purposes - its us against ourselves. The change to acceptance is within. Can we find the "place on the porch" together?