Oh my... uhm, ok, please know that i am boycotting reality more or less these days..., and this because i've really got too much on my plate. i say this yet i do find the time to keep my eye on what i deem to be the most important player in these times: mother nature.... just to give you the overall picture: in the 80's i knew an old italian sailor who would say, "after God, the weather" and i always wondered why he separated the two...
so yes, what i'm about to write is very subjective, if not naive and simplistic. i admit it! for me, my words here are not debatable as such because this is just the way i perceive things (and i haven't been reading as much as used to either...). for that matter, it is not really even an opinion as much as it is a perspective. and there is a significant difference for me: i've been out of it for a while now and so have been on the sidelines, much like someone watching a bike
race in a huge crowd. here goes:
when i was in the states in 20-16 (yes, election time). i was in a part of the country that was more than certain that it would become 'great' again. the deep south... and when i felt less intimidated, i'd ask (over and over again, in a matter-of-fact tone) 'but if you vote for him, who is going to run the country?' it got so bad that i stopped talking with people, reading or listening to the news.
for me, once the vermont-man was eliminated, the election had no longer any brains, any IQ, and more importantly, any heart. suddenly, it became about which candidate potentially provided the less worse outcome. we could probably agree on how the whole thing was just utterly pathetic.
and the tactics used disgusted me: i saw my country being hopelessly divided as never before: the middle class was pit against the poor; the 'upright' against those who are not straight. for me, it pitted the "great" against the not-so-great. for me, H was there pretending to care so to get the crowd rooting for the guy with the biggest heart (the vermont-man).
i saw the issues being discussed as smokescreens, as a means of hiding much bigger interests, those of wealthy businesses. beneath these tactics, i imagined big-business interests in a face-to face boxing match (each candidate, a puppet representing corrupt and extremely competitive big interests). it was so sad how their strategies of creating conflict between its poor and working poor and even middle class was working... and did anyone notice that without the vermont-man, the rich were eclipsed, forgotten, and thus seemed so innocent?
during this time, i kept thinking about the jimmy carter election in '76. i was a kid then, and my grandparents were taking my sis and me to nearly every
single state in their camper. they listened to the news on the
radio every night and were so excitedly happy when he won. i kept recalling the values that were discussed over the
radio, in their camper and just couldn't come to accept the present situation: this election, happening years later, seemed so surreal!
then it was done. i became so depressed, so utterly depressed to even think of what what happening to my home (thank goodness i could return to europe!). yet, even though i tuned out, i couldn't miss how the first group of americans to tangibly lose out after the elections were women. and yes, i remember how they marched with their pussy hats. and i was so proud of them. for me it was obvious that women needed to point out that we really and truly do not want the return to the times of the hangar.
then the guy in charge started in with his demeaning comments... just as a creep and a bully would. he opened pandora's box. a few sex stories later, and the straw broke the camel's back. so it is no wonder we've had a rebound effect with all of these women coming to the forefront saying they had been raped or abused by men. individually, women felt the need to say, enough is enough. collectively, women feel the need to say, enough is enough. this said, for me, they are speaking up against abuse, not all men.
so, i ask myself why WE (on this thread, in a little
cockpit enjoying a beer together) would fall into the men vs women debate at all. i see us as being in the same
boat, on the same team, each bringing the best of ourselves as we express opinions and seeing the perspectives of one another. we've gotten through a lot already...
but knowing how i tend to be an optimist and see the best in people, i am open to question myself: am i really just a flowerchild or are these women like me deep down? so i ask myself these questions:
are these women marching against their husbands, their ex's, their bosses. my feeling is that, even though the individual stories getting
screen time make it look so, the underlying principles of this march are much more large-scale and political than this.
could it be that the women marching clearly see the ultra-right (that would prefer them in the home) hiding behind a clown doing his world-famous smokescreen number? my feeling is yes. definitely.
and are they not marching against other aspects of the ultra-right? my sis and her son have obamacare... how many women out there need obamacare because their jobs don't not provide benefits and they do not make enough to pay for bluecross bluesheild or whatever? my feeling is yes.
and are they not marching because it is unacceptable, downright unacceptable that a country turn its back on their own, like
puerto rico, and the
environment and even their worldwide friendships? my feeling is yes
and isn't it unacceptable that a top authority tempt himself with red buttons? is it not unacceptable to raise
kids with the feeling that it could happen any day now, on some guy's whim? my feeling is yes.
and isn't it unacceptable, to side with he who condones those who light bonfires and dress in white hooded robes? and isn't it wrong to call a country a 'hole' of any kind?
and isn't it unacceptable that a foreign country be associated in playing cards in our democratic process at all?
for me, the fact that the focus is placed on female vs male is a distraction. it is about the abuse of power. to twist information to turn people against one another is a smokescreen tactic, like the attention given to the mexican border and the claim that
mexico will going to pay for it...
so why would the ultra-right need to use a clown to throw the crowd smokescreens?
the answer for me is simple. it suffices to look at what legislation is happening, the bill that are being passed. for instance, the war on obamacare (and everything obama - whether you like him or not is not of importance). and then tax laws are being passed that allow mega riches to remain with the mega-richest folks: imagine an 11 million dollar tax cut! geez! is this acceptable? or is this an abouse of power? for me, legislation is working in the interest of the ultra-right (to the detriment of women, the
environment, social structures and services (and this doesn't mean i'm going to side up with the democrats...).
beyond this, indian lands and protected lands are being vied so to be blasted for every drop of gas. geez, do we really want to invest money in a short-term solution to a long-term problem? do we really want to live with this kind of guilt? isn't this an abuse of power?
even though most women
work full-time and then go home to care for their
kids (as do men, but there are 'second shift' stats that give women a bit more of the chores), i think women have taken note of these things and care.
i think they have also noticed how many times the islands get blasted with category 4 and 5 storms. i think they have thought about what will happen (given
current conditions) if the next Irma turned and made landfall. or if that long-awaited earthquake hit
california... i think women are concerned about the impact of a rising sea level coupled by these storms... the effect on
animals and natural habitat.
and before everyone starts in with the typical debate issues concerning the environment, please, please please see my perspective on this:
for me, even this topic of the environment has been twisted so to pit all of us against one another. instead of asking if it is the fault of humans, should we not be focusing on doing what we can to prevent the mess and clean up the mess? after all, the mess is happening. the mess is here. plastics getting caught in our propellers for starters...
to debate whether mankind created the changes or not is another smokescreen designed to pit us against one another. for me, the smokescreens serve to keep us from asking ourselves this: what kind of future is coming at us? what about tomorrow?
so, you might now reply and say to me that the women marching only care about themselves (their rights, their paychecks and the shoes they can buy), but my feeling is that women do concern themselves with the long-term.
as a whole, i feel that we worry about our children's welfare and even our grandchildren's welfare, right up the staircase of time. this is not to say that you men do not. i'm sure each of you here does. and this is why we can gain a higher perspective together and avoid tearing one another apart.
so... well... as i said, this is my naive perspective. i am not active in these marches because i do not see the male vs. female being my primary concern (even if my own experiences could propel me to do so). i see men and women being very capable of working together, striving together to make our homes, small-scale and large (right up to the planet) a better place. sofiphilia.
as for the old italian sailor... he died of pneumonia on his
boat in the canary islands in 1990, alone. and i can still hear him say, "after God, the weather" and still, to this day, wonder why people continue to separate the two...
Life would be pretty boring without our gender differences, no? 
But maybe if a credible & relevant definition is offered it might be worth debating after all. 
Just like insulting a man's choice to marry a woman of a different nationality or background. 
Linear Mode
Recent Discussions