The Ayn Rand Effect?

I wonder if there is a scientific name for this effect:

That in any situation in which a system is put in place to help a group of people who are presumed to need it, some people who do not "need it" will seek to take advantage of the assistance anyway, and some will succeed. Then, a large third party will equate every single person who utilizes the help to be cheating the system by taking its assistance on false pretenses, creating a social and political situation with loud, vocal deriders claiming that these people are (all) leeches who could get by fine on their own, and any and all users of the systems become stigmatized. It happens with welfare, it happens with food banks, it happens with the LGBT community and supports therein, it happens with trans people and feminists and ethnic minorities; any group of any kind that is partially or wholly disadvantaged in some way, and which people seek to help out of that disadvantage by giving them focused support.
The stigma generally does not start because they are given help, but is deepened or shaped by it.
I wonder what that would be called? Perhaps the Ayn Rand Effect?

Thinking on this got me taking a second look at her philosophies. Some of it's quite sensible if I look at it to understand, rather than outright seeking conflict. I think I can see precisely what she's talking about and warrant her her insight on it, and then see exactly where she makes an oversimplification and calls something an absolute that isn't.

For instance the assertion that sex is "not possible in self-abasement". I read what she's describing about sex, and I know what she's talking about. To see in one's partner's surrender the glorification of one's identity... Suggesting then that I love and desire another person because they, as I understand them, are a complement to my own self-image; because taking them (and them in particular) as mine to please and please myself upon glorifies what I am. I don't actually have any objection to that; she's right, it does. But she stumbles, I think, it defining that as "Sex". It is Ideal and Idealized Sex, as she sees it, and I do not disagree, but it's only one subset of the many possible acts called sex. Sex IS possible in self-abasement. She talks about that as well, and in so doing contradicts herself; but only because she has stooped to making a battle cry of an oversimplified absolute statement and an emotional trope, because one cannot easily make battle cries of the complicated, grey-shaded and fiddly truth. Amusingly, if I am reading this right, that act is against her own philosophy, but nevertheless a mistake she is frequently prone to.

That and a tendency to really overblown patriotism, and perhaps a blindness to downsides of decisions and ideals that she cares for strongly. Common problem, that. Significantly worse problem for a philosopher than a member of the general populace to have. More damaging there. Ah, but of course she speaks of her vision of Idealized America, just as she speaks of Idealized sex. Its victories, without its failures, as though those could be separated and held in different histories. Disregarding the times, and the frequency of the times, that it has failed to live up to its own ostensible vision, and to uphold its own ostensible values. Or indeed, the places where its apparent victories were attributed to glorious virtue, but were as much the result of, for instance, oppression and literal slavery.

Ha. I feel like doing a bit of my own political-sounding speechifying, so I will:

"I disagree with her. Altruism and selfishness, for all that they seem often to pull in opposite directions, are not enemies and are not mutually incompatible any more than the expansion and the contraction of a person's beating heart are enemies and mutually incompatible. They can be balanced. Indeed, they must be balanced, or the individual quickly collapses and dies.
I believe that it IS possible to construct a society in which there is a bottom absolute limit, a floor, to how far a person's wealth and quality of life is allowed to fall, but with no corresponding absolute limit to how high it may rise; if only it were to be agreed that this state is desirable, and to then construct it with this goal in mind.
I believe that giving to others and keeping for oneself are both forces that belong in every life, are both sources of happiness and joy, and that they complement one another as such. To find a healthy balance between them is one of the necessary steps to create a happy and purposeful life, without resentment or hate or shame."

What brought all this on?

Well, the study of and comments on Ayn Rand were of course off of the thought that her name and reputation might fit the effect I was describing, and the thoughts on that effect are a repetition of something I find myself mulling over from time to time. In this case, it was all prompted, somewhat indirectly, by a SciShow video on the Taboos of Science. In the comments, biological and formative differences between different ethnicities and sexes was a (fairly obvious) subject discussed as a taboo of science, as it has become faux pas to admit or suggest that there are meaningful and significant differences there due to some irritating exaggerations associated with the equality movements.

There was also mention of the classification of gender dysphoria as a disease, which got me thinking about the way some people question the existence or legitimacy of trans people and also sufferers of things like Aspergers and Bipolar Disorder, and on from there to an old recurring series of thoughts on how youth who are acting destructively or poorly are frequently dismissed as "just seeking attention," as though seeking attention when one is lonely, hurt, or confused and facing something they don't know how to solve is inherently wrong and shameful, which is obvious bullshit. While acting out destructively is not an acceptable means to it (albeit sometimes true that suffering people do not know how to ask directly), seeking attention should not be seen as a wrong. The "just seeking attention" tends to imply lying and making up ailments or exaggerating them in order to get the attention that may actually BE needed.

Admittedly this actually does happen a fair bit because lesser problems or less severe cases of problems are often dismissed, mocked or ignored, making exaggeration sometimes (tragically and socially destructively) necessary to get help of any kind. And then those who do truly suffer from the ailments most often used as excuses suffer further from stigmatization and an impression that their ailment does not exist because the false complainers reflect badly on them. That's an example of the broad effect I was talking about, which I think also holds true in this broader sense.
That's what brought this on.

Less Boring

You know...
Let's give this a second, shall we?

You know, yesterday, I saw a bible thumper's recruitment card, and a plastic coin with a bible quote on it, and a pamphlet, all tucked into street posts and such things on my way in to school, and I tore the card in half, and collected the coin and the the pamphlet and put them in the garbage and the recycling bin, respectively. I had read the first side of the card, and half of the second side, and both sides of the coin because the writing was so short it would be hard not to, and the first few pages of the pamphlet, just to give whoever had written it a chance. I don't think I need to say anything about what was written on them, because there was nothing the least bit surprising about any of it, if you have seen such items before.

And I found myself thinking, I admit rather bitterly, that maybe if for once they said something simple instead of trying to play really insultingly obvious manipulative games by trying to dangle mysterious wisdom at you, maybe if they just said, "At 123 Somewhere St, at 6-9 PM on May 29th, we are going to talk about God. All comers welcome, any faith or none." Maybe that would be intriguing. Maybe that would be a good way to actually start a conversation about something interesting and complex like God. It would have gotten MY attention.

I think even people who are not very analytical, in my generation, are dead sick of being patronized to by people who think they are older and wiser, or think they are representing something older and wiser.

I find it disappointing that so few people seem to reach the conclusion that in order to actually catch the interest of people in my generation, even the ones who aren't very analytical, the best strategy would be to look at your intended invitation, and try to see it through someone else's eyes, and try to identify anything that sounded the slightest bit like manipulation or patronizing, and remove it. To try to figure out what you actually wanted from people, and then try to figure out how to ask them for it so frankly and honestly that they would at least be surprised, which makes people THINK, and might even believe it was honest.

And then it occurred to me that while that probably was the best way to start a conversation about God or anything similarly divisive, if you used an honest hook to get people in the door, those people would probably only leave if you started trying to preach to them; if the meeting itself didn't match the frank honesty of the invitation. Then you would have only hurt the chances of the next person who tried to catch those same peoples' attention by being so frank and honest it might surprise them. Because then, they would have already seen that trick before.

So maybe it's for the best that people who don't know how not to patronize in predictable, annoying patterns don't know how not to patronize even for long enough to try to get your attention.

Someone on the internet got my attention today. They posted a chest-high text wall of complete and undisguised gobbledygook as a blog comment in a place that already inspired thought, and that was a surprising, interesting thing to do. It hadn't been removed by the owner of the blog, and that was also surprising and interesting. And the username that posted that comment had an embedded link to somewhere else, somewhere where another message was written, that wasn't gobbledygook, and wasn't obviously manipulative.

So I say to this unknown person: I don't trust you, but you have my attention. What would you like to do with it?

The Art of Frugality

Of Poverty I was Made, and I Know the Art of Frugality.

Excerpts from a conversation on July 10th

My secret on saving? Well, primarily, I suppose, it's a combination of two things. Firstly, keeping expenses low, and secondly, putting my savings away in a distinct account and treating it as different from the rest of my budget - once I put money into my tax free savings account, I do not take it out again unless I really need to in order to cover necessities like groceries, rent and laundry. I try to put $100 into my savings account every paycheque, if I can, which is twice a month. To be fair, a large chunk of my savings also came from my tax refund this year. Goodwill employees get a free tax preparation with H&R Block, and my refund was modestly impressive, perhaps in part because I was only employed for half the year, and that only part time at minimum wage. I suppose I can claim it is to my credit that I was responsible enough to save the extra money instead of finding some personal fancy to spend it on.

I could also share some of the things I do to keep expenses low: I entertain myself with low- to no-cost hobbies like watching YouTube, playing inexpensive video games and collecting images from various sources, then making them into tokens compatible with the Maptool program (I'm sure to most other people, it would be boring busywork, but I enjoy it). I buy cheaper brands and types of food supplies and do some cooking with simple ingredients. I keep a casual eye out for decent sales on practical necessities like toilet paper, soap, shampoo, etc, and buy non-perishables when they are very cheap even if I don't need them yet. It helps that I work at a thrift store, where I can find a lot of useful things at low prices, like clothing, utensils, dishes... even furniture and a vacuum cleaner.

I also, incidentally, have a habit of collecting potentially useful things when I can buy them for a dollar or two at the Goodwill where I work, including: shoelaces, pencils, soap, spare earbud headphones, an extra USB mouse, greeting cards and notebooks (I have long since reached the point of confessing to myself that I collect stationery not so much out of a genuine belief I will use it all but as a little hobby because I like to), gift wrap, and generic presents or gifts suitable for friends of mine.

Heck, I'm a scavenger by nature. That helps too.

I rarely buy clothing or shoes, because I recognize that I have enough of both, and I have a habit of preferring to wear my clothing and shoes until they are ruined, in order to feel I have gotten full use out of them. An exception is socks, which I buy occasionally from the thrift store and have a large collection of stored away for the future, many of which I have never worn. There is a reason for this. With socks as well, I like to wear them out, and so there are a large number of pairs of socks I am doggedly trying to wear until they get holes in so that I can get them out of circulation. There is another reason. From time to time, especially before I started taking my mood-balancing medication, I used to wear a brand new pair of socks as a way to treat myself if I was having a hard day and wanted to go easier on myself than normal, or just felt in need of a little bit of luxury. I still occasionally do this, which puts a new pair into circulation. I only ever choose to wear a pair of socks I have never worn before with careful consideration. There's just something special about it.

I think one of the vital things I do is leave myself a buffer in my budget for little treats and shortcuts. New socks are wonderful, but sometimes one needs more to cheer one up, like eating out at Subway for a meal, or picking up a coffee at Tim Hortons during my lunch break at work. I strongly suspect that some people fail by telling themselves they won't spend money on these kinds of extras, and using it all up, then finding that the temptation is too great and spending money they don't have anymore on extras anyway. Then they feel guilty. Why feel guilty? I give myself permission to get treats from time to time, and I budget accordingly, saving a fair amount of my day to day budget for little pick-me-ups and also unexpected needs - like having to replace something that breaks, or buy cough medicine and throat lozenges, for instance. And if I turn out not to need it all, great! That just means I have more money for next month, and maybe I can afford to get something really neat! Or make a donation to somebody or something I want to support.

To Share The Cup That Runneth Over

Someone on FetLife was asking for peoples' perspectives on the influence of our past parental abuse on those of us who have been abused and how it relates to our own desire to have, or to avoid having, children. Her voice was impassioned and full of a great deal of understandable internal conflict. It's clear she wants the good things that come with having children, and desperately wants to love and care for someone, but realizes that her scars may get in the way, and doesn't want to be a bad parent.

I would like to share my response with you all.

The best way I feel I can answer this is to tell my own stories related to it. 

I was inspired by the subtle, psychological abuses of my childhood to be vehemently vocal about bad parenting when I see it, especially when parents become frustrated with their childrens' natural curiosity and desire to learn, seeing virtually anything other than quiet obedience as disobedience, even when they only the actions of a young, inexperienced human engaged with the world and trying to gain the experience required to be a wise, functional adult.
And then later, I found VHEMT. 

I am not convinced that the human race has no chance of improving and willfully evolving socially and morally to progressively better states, and therefore don't think I actually want us to go extinct, but I definitely would prefer to see a smaller human race, with more quality, and less quantity, of life. The fewer people there are to share resources with, the bigger everyone's fair share can be. 

And this is why I've decided never to give birth, even though the thought is a fetish of mine.
However, it doesn't mean I don't want to be a mother.
I am still scarred and rendered dysfunctional by my own past abuses. In many ways the wisdom and sensitivity gained from my suffering has made me a generally very patient and level-headed person, but I am also prone to fits of anxiety and rage. Furthermore, I am young, and at the very beginning of my career. 

But someday, if I have greater financial stability, and if I have healed further and feel less controlled by my overpowering emotions, I will almost certainly want to participate in the growing and nurturing of children who were not born to me. I may foster-parent, or adopt. Or I may find my way into a nurturing role in my profession, or find my way into a household that accepts me in a role as a supportive carer and guardian to the children of someone else. 

Personally, I find it hard to believe that any child, even in the best and most well-adapted of families, could not benefit from one more loving, supportive adult in their life to encourage them to be the best that they could be; And equally hard to believe that any parent, even with the best luxuries and availability of resources and time, would not benefit from one more loving, supportive adult who could share the stresses of caring for a child when they become taxing, and thus prevent the build-up of frustration that can lead to that frustration being inappropriately taken out on the child. 

But to answer the question that stood out most to me in your post...
"If you feel, like you have love and tender loving care to give, who do you direct that energy to, if it is not kids?" 

Why... To everyone, of course. Neighbors going through hard times. Co-workers. Friends. And definitely lovers, whether they be short or long term. Absolutely everyone, not only children, and to be sure not only our own blood children, can use some Tender-Loving-Care. It is one of the greatest weaknesses of our Western society that we tend to forbid one another from taking responsibility for one another, and in turn, we forbid one another from asking for badly needed help. 

If you have love and Tender-Loving-Care to give, and you find no-one receiving it, if your cup runneth over with no-one to drink... Go to your best friends and congenial workmates, go to your lovers and partners and crushes, and if it is permissible within their circles, then go to theirs... go to those people with whom you can easily empathize, and encourage them to draw from your well of kindness whenever they are thirsty. 

All too frequently the only socially acceptable answer, to create a new life in to nurture and build up, because for some incredibly stupid reason we have been forbidden to nurture and build one another, is the only one that comes to mind. But especially for those of us who are damaged and who runneth over, but sometimes also run dry... We know in our doubts that creating a life for our love and care, and then becoming overwhelmed and filling it up also with our frustrations and tempers, becoming bad parents... Is all too real a possibility. 

Before you forge a new cup that you may not be able to fill all by yourself, then... I encourage you to seek out all of those cups near to your heart that are beginning to run low, and ask gently and patiently for permission to refill them. Break the stupid rules that forbid us from caring, mothering and looking out for one another. It is, of course, a delicate dance, and important not to be overbearing, but simply to be loving and available. But it's a well-known fact that parenting isn't easy. And this holds true whether the people you're parenting are children, or blood family, or not. 

I hope this helped.

The Sweet Delays

My training with the new company has been delayed a week, unfortunately. I suppose this gives me more time to practice my script, but I am disappointed and restless. I was ready, and am. I want to start NOW!

I went to see my ex and his girlfriend in hospital after she damaged her leg slipping on the ice. It was nice to see her again. We've only really met once before. In the hospital waiting room, the two of us together softly sung a single chorus of Mordred's Lullaby. We sing beautifully together, and I hope that we will do it more in the future. It was a magnificent moment. She turned to me with bright eyes and a grin and said, "So, you're a Heather Dale fan, are you?" Someone she works with mistook us for sisters.

It should say a great deal, I hope, to forgiveness and peace, that I and the present girlfriend of my ex, who is part of the reason he is my ex, do such things.

I also went out intending to buy notebooks, which I did, and highlighters, which I could not find in the dollar store, and a city transit map, which I did not buy because the line at the transit office was so long. And because I was already starting to have a panic attack.

Now facing the real prospect of a job I can, and will, excell at, even though I have not started yet... I think forward, to costume design, and street theatre, and activism. Once I can afford it, I will participate. I have been thinking brave and beautiful thoughts along those lines of late.

And... I found myself back at torture and thick in the panic of fear, of dread, to the point that I started to feel physically ill, and clung to the most peaceful and comforting and nonaggressive songs I could find on the iPod to bear it out. I stopped at Goodwill on my way home, still in that panic, thinking to talk to the awesome, sweet geeky young lady receptionist who has often cheered me up, though never out of something like this before... and ask if there was a quiet place I could cry and curl up and someone I could talk to. Several times I almost bailed, choked out an "um" to beg her not to call any particular attention to my need or make exception, or to take anyone away from potentially important work to see me.

I ended up talking to her in an empty office for I'm not sure how long... perhaps half an hour, perhaps more, spilling my terrible difficulty: "you know... don't think of a pink elephant? ... Don't think, try really really hard not to think of... pushpins. Or better, paper clips. And the remarkable depths of human ingenuity. ...And police brutality. And the fact that apparently masked protest is illegal in this country."

Knowing I will soon be able to afford to build costumes, schedule time on activities without my continued involvement in them hinging on whether I find a job that needs that time slot at some point... The risks of what I know I will do, what I know I will nerve myself to do, what I dream of doing, what I will condemn myself for a coward if I do not do... It all comes much more real, and I'm sure it will come much more real yet.

I will cry beforehand so that I can keep my eyes and my mind clear and alert and ready when vital moments come.
I will get my flinching done ahead of the act.
Or after it, I can curl up and weep.
Anytime but during.
Of course, I will strive to do so in the safest and most harmless of ways that can still have dramatic effect, and with all due caution. I only fear for that even the most peaceful of dissent can and certainly will be criminalized in worst case scenarios. For which I absolutely must be prepared.

Prepare for the worst.
Strive for the best.
Expect the most likely, but prepare to be surprised.

The time talking to my friend the receptionist greatly helped me. The fact that I was able to approach her and ask for the moment of help, and follow through, in a public setting, is a definite mark of progress. Overall... today has been a very good, empowering day.
Be proud of me.

I don't think I feel happy.
I feel... like a weak and struggling creature. Growing slightly less weak.
I feel wholesome. I do not feel victorious, but I do feel brave, albeit terribly frightened. I feel resolved, and open, and I feel I have allies.
I feel comforted.
None of these things are happiness. But they are good things.

Fools Of Us

You just cannot win when you're wrong

Though the battle be bloody and long

Oh, the truth will make fools of us all

And the longer you cling to illusion,

the harder you'll fall.

We were all of us ignorant, once

We fought with our lies and the battles were lost

To have wisdom, we must pay the cost

Bitter remedy swallowed with pride

'neath the hat of the dunce

The truth will come out...

It always does, in time.

And the louder you shout

The more foolish you'll look, to yourself

at the end of the line

You just cannot win when you're wrong

Though the battle be bloody and long

Oh, the truth will make fools of us all

And the longer you cling to illusion,

the harder you'll fall.

You just cannot win when you're wrong

Though your allies be wordy, your arguments strong

You may hide behind tyranny, authority,

maybe last your whole life;

Doesn't matter how long, you will never be right

The truth will come out...

It always does, in time.

And the louder you shout

The more foolish you'll look, to yourself

at the end of the line

You just cannot win when you're wrong

Though your allies be wordy, your arguments strong

You may silence dissent, but what victory is that?

You're no closer to truth for each tongue you cut loose

And the truth will come out...

As always, it's yours to decide...

To acknolwedge the loss;

To abandon your pride;

To be wrong,

to be free,

to be right...

Oh the truth will make fools of us-

You just cannot win when you're wrong

Though the battle be bloody and long

Oh, the truth will make fools of us all

And the longer you cling to illusion,

the harder you'll fall.

The truth will make fools of us all!

99% Furry Deviant Approved

I went out grocery shopping today. I brought my Damon with me, and we picked up a bunch of nice things, more than just my standard fare. I got myself ice cream and treats, and got Damon some doughnut sticks, in celebration of my having a new job. I spent most of the rest of my money for this month... It is December, and I will admit, I had been splurging a bit on presents and shipping sending things to people I love, as well as getting things for myself, like a new pair of ear buds since my old ones died. I haven't paid my bills for the month yet, but it's a phenomenally liberating feeling having a pay cheque on the way.

And then, waiting at the bus stop, loaded down with soda, chips and delicious holiday eggnog... I noticed I had another voice mail from work. I gave my supervisor, the friendly and bubbly one, a call. She had left me a message last night, too, asking me to come in for a second training shift on Friday. I had tried to call back, but it didn't seem to be working. It worked this time, and I told her I had gotten her message, sorry for not getting back earlier, told her the reason, and yes of course I can come in on Friday.

She told me she'd spoken with the boss and they had decided they were going to stick with their current team for the time being. I was invited to come in to collect my pay for the two hour orientation I went to. I hurried to politely thank her for telling me, and fumble for my bus pass, as our bus rolled up to the stop.

As you might imagine, I was shocked, stunned, hurt... and maybe even a little panicky, especially since I had slipped my bus pass in a different pocket from the one I usually put it in, and took a minute to find it.

My first thoughts, once I started having thoughts beyond panic and where I had put my bus pass, was that my supervisor or my boss found it unprofessional that I hadn't gotten back after their message early enough, or that they were expecting me to come in today for second training after all (it had been suggested that I would be asked to do so earlier) despite the message asking me to do it on Friday.

My second thoughts were that this was probably because I had mentioned that I haven't worked for a while and would have to adapt my sleep schedule to working again, or that I'd just been too casual and personal in my jokes with my supervisor, talking about memories of listening to cassette tapes as a child, which one of their case models reminded me of (they have one shaped like an old-fashioned audio casette), and such things. Maybe I had somehow offended her or raised a red flag, and she was just too good at masking that kind of thing for me to notice any change in her smile or her laugh. Maybe she had taken my questions and comments during training about harder cases being more likely to crack as antagonism towards the products, or a sign of likely inability to sell them. Maybe I would never be able to get work as long as I naturally fell into patterns of being casual and friendly with anyone I grew to trust at all...

And then, after a while, it finally hit me. I remember at some point while dealing with this blog, finding something about backlinks. Since I am the author of this blog, Blogger will tell me if there is another website somewhere on the internet that links to this one, and will link me to it so I can go and check out who is giving me publicity. You remember that link on my last post, to the Speaking Phones gallery website? If the owner of that website has access to backlinks too... and I strongly suspect this is a thing that is not limited to blogs... then he just got access to that blog post, everything I said about my uncertainty about selling rhinestone covered bling, and the implication that I had not meant to keep the job long (but was now considering doing so, given how the place exceeded all my expectations). In fact, he got access to all my blog posts, and my Fetlife account, and anything else linked to my online persona and the name SerpentStare.

And it turns out I hadn't gotten the job yet. I might as well have stood up on my chair at an interview and shouted, "I'm gay and furry and kinky and proud of it!". Now that... that would explain this, much better than having said something too casual or failed to answer a non-urgent message with urgent timing.

I guess I can't blame them, especially given how harsh I've been in my socialist and anti-capitalist and anti-work epithets on the site here... I remember hearing somewhere that there's no such thing as bad publicity, and I had hoped that my employers would feel that way... Maybe they feel that if I'm willing to use my personal life to plug and promote my work life, I might use my work life to spread pro-fetish ideology, or something? No, I know better than that. I guess for whatever reason, they didn't want their website even remotely associated with me. I will try to remember not to link to any other employers I end up being considered by, lest they find out I am a deviant of great calibre and pride. You might notice, I have gone back to the two previous posts on this blog that featured my real name and removed it, so that it does not come up on a Google search. However, since I seem to have already lost this one, I will leave the existing links up. Speaking Phones was, after all, the reason I labelled that last one "Cool Stuff on the Internet". The website seems a bit broken, and doesn't show all of their stock... at least not on Chrome... but I really was looking forward to working there. There was a lot of cool gear, and I encourage any readers who are looking for cellphone accessories in the London area or near a different one of their branches to check them out.

For now... If I get an email or phone call from someone at Speaking Phones asking me to remove all direct references and/or links to their website, I will do so. I don't really expect them to do that, though, since it would kind of suggest I'd been discriminated against if it turned out the identifying information on my blog was what kept them from hiring me, and it would suggest that they had, in fact, read my blog, if they asked me to remove content from it. Ah, discrimination. Everyone does it, but no-one can admit it, because then there might be legal problems. I haven't had to deal with it a whole lot - at least, not comparatively speaking... and, well, I guess I kind of forgot it existed and I should stay guarded against it, there, for a moment.

And now I'm broke. I assumed I had a job, I celebrated, I stopped to tell you all (and Ontario Works for that matter) about it... and now... I don't. I will need some help to get through this month, I think... though having had a moment to think about it, I'm pretty sure I've got all the help I need. There are people I can ask for assistance in moments like this, thankfully. Damon among them, though he can't help me with money, only moral support.

I'll make it through this. It's a staggering and disappointing blow, but I'll make it. I'm really glad Damon was there with me when I got that memo, he was a huge help. And to Speaking Phones... like it or not, you have my approval, in pretty much everything except, naturally, the decision not to hire me. Maybe you'll change your mind. Maybe you won't. Anyway, best of luck.

Choice and Responsibility

I clicked into a serious talk on YouTube today. I wasn't really looking for it, not actively anyway. It was about choice, capitalism, and the paralysis of clinging to what little we have rather than risking the loss of it by moving to engineer social change. It strikes kind of hard... I'm familiar with this truth. I think it may be one of the things I was trying to talk about with To Do What I Must While I Am Who I Am.

It also reminds me of The Little Prince. I find myself almost wanting to cry as I think even of myself, trying to force myself to ascribe to something I do not believe, the idea that submitting to the need to work on whatever my employer's terms are will empower me to make a difference, rather than making me a supportive cog in a system I despise and disempowering me by giving me something I must fear to lose...

I see myself trying to mount a stressful job search, with minimal resources and trying to bury my resentment of the system that puts me here and demands that I serve it in order to live a better life... turning into what the Prince would call a 'mushroom'; putting off, ignoring, or dismissing important matters of emotionality, sensitivity and wonder because "I am concerned with matters of consequence!"

I do not want to take solace in that phrase or in the necessity of my busywork. I don't want to allow myself any excuse for not doing what I believe in in every way I can.

And yet... I must job search, I must work. If I refused, I would be denied what little survival budget I am being given, and pushed into an even smaller, darker hole. To avoid both would be dishonest and as such a betrayal of principles I hold most dear. I am already concerned with matters of consequence... matters of survival. And I must admit I already kind of hate myself for it.

I wrote in the very first pages of the notebook that's now become my journal, quite some time ago:

People in a culture with as much technology, resources and interconnectivity as ours have absolutely no right to be concerned about their mere survival.

I am guilty of this, and feel that I have failed, not on my own lack of merit, but as one of the billions, as a member of the whole human race. I also wrote:

Western culture has adopted the image of an organization collapsing under its own obsession with efficiency - efficiency itself compromised by endless lawsuits over liability and breach of protocol...
A machine so frantically upgrading and replacing its pieces that it tears itself apart.

The Serpent Street Choir

The last meeting of Grit Uplifted in the session of fourteen was today. I feel slightly bloated. There was a small party with baked goods and a free beverage from Red Roaster, courtesy of the facilitators of the group. And then dinner at the Center of Hope directly afterward.

I spent some time after the confidence boost of reading some of my newest work at Grit walking the streets and imagining that I were leading a practiced choir of recruits from My Sister's Place and the expanded community in a slow march through the streets, singing "I Have a Right" together; two people carrying large, cardboard signs in clear black and white, one with "I Have a Right, by Sonata Arctica, from their album Stones Grow Her Name", and the other with "adapted and performed with choir by (me - name removed)" on either side by the front; instrumentalists who wanted to join in playing a simple, repeated rhythm on drums, perhaps even a guitarist.

For a long, instrumental break, I imagined the choir filling the space with a simple, rhythmic refrain in increasingly complex harmony (perhaps with parts of it singing a supportive harmony in simple aah's or la's),

"I have a right. You have a right. We have a right. We all have a right. The rich have a right. The poor have a right. The old have a right. The young have a right." ...Back into the chorus.

I imagined drawing much energy and attention while slowly progressing down some streets.

Only thoughts... But such beautiful, beautiful thoughts they are.

I really must think about trying to start up a small choir group at My Sister's Place. It would be an early step to some wonderful thing like this actually happening.

Ah, and in my imagination, with my ego, I called it The Serpent Street Choir.

The Ignorance of Privilege

I wrote a response to a video a while ago that I'd like to share here. It was a response to this episode of SF Debris science fiction reviews. This video presented Real Life, an episode of Star Trek Voyager in which the Emergency Medical Hologram bonds with a holographic family in order to better understand human relationships, but then eventually has to face tragedy as his holographic daughter dies. Chuck is very passionate in his objection to some of the messages in the episode, and the way that this tragedy was ultimately handled. Go watch it if you want more context, but in essence he stated quite clearly his own answer to the question of whether something like this is traumatic enough that anyone capable of simply avoiding the situation to begin with and never facing it is truly fortunate to have that option, or whether the personal growth and maturing that comes with having to live through and deal with tragedy is worth facing it. His stance? Some things are bad enough that there should be no shame in avoiding them if you can, and losing a child is definitely one of them.

Here are my original thoughts on the subject, edited slightly for better clarity and to correct a typo or two:

I remember your turn-around of the old saying "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger", refuting it as inaccurate. "I make me stronger when I refuse to let it kill me." However, this saying, in either form, only deals with the two extremes of the spectrum of possibilities. In the aftermath of a tragic event, you can fail to come out of it at all, or you can get through it... And it isn't always true that you will necessarily come out of it stronger if you survive. Some events cause forever crippling, or at least scarring, injuries. Sometimes the price you had to pay to get through it set you back years of development in some form or another. This can be physical, like a fractured bone that never completely heals, or an accident leaving one bedridden for so long that the patient has to learn to walk all over again afterwards. It can also be emotional.

The most unfortunate thing is that I haven't seen many examples of people who were able to understand that some struggles just aren't worth it even if you survive them... that the scars and damages are, and remain, greater than the strength gained in facing them, that they have never been truly overcome, and possibly never will be... without having been through such a situation in some form or another themselves. I remember hearing someone refer to it as something like the "ignorance of privilege". It's not a clear fault of the ignorant that they are ignorant, either. It is genuinely hard to imagine a situation in which there is no possible way to come out ahead... and for most people, it seems to be impossible, up until the first time they realize... this... whatever "this" is... is one.

Perhaps the only way to change this is to refute and avoid reaffirming the lie that if you got through it, it was good for you. Unfortunately, it IS true that having gotten through it required growth that would otherwise not have come about in the same way... People who have dealt with tragedy are almost always better prepared and better able to deal with it again - not that it isn't still a terrible experience, just that, like any pain that hurts badly enough, long enough, there is a numbing effect that diminishes its effects on you. The lie is in the assumption that this hardening is "worth" the pain, which is a value judgement, and thus inherently an opinion. People may disagree. The problem is when people who are not in a position to understand the severity of the situation... which really, includes anyone without the full context of emotional weight and other issues involved, and thus anyone at all besides the person experiencing this trauma... try to make that judgement themselves and enforce it on the person suffering it.

From The Fruits of Whose Labour

I have been talking to a friend about my socialist ideals, and there are a couple of things he said in response that I'd like to address publicly, not just to him. My friend said: "As I understand it you are suggesting that everyone should be able to live without 'working'."

If this is the case, he misunderstands it, but only slightly. I am suggesting that each individual should be able to live without having to work. Without being compelled to work. The pivotal point is the idea that we do not have enough, or advanced enough, technology that things can function without anyone doing anything... but that we do have enough technology that we could, conceivably, fill all the roles truly necessary for everyone to have a decent minimum of safety, comfort, and happiness, on a volunteer basis.

And that even more easily, we could produce significantly more wealth (measured in things like food, living spaces, technology, medical care, and other goods and services both basic and luxurious) than would be required for everyone to live at this comfortable minimum standard... and portion some of the extra stuff, particularly the luxurious and higher quality or less fundamentally necessary stuff, as rewards to those who do wish to work.

The system would not be that different, fundamentally, from the way it is now, save that instead of having to earn enough money to cover our rent, groceries, medical bills, transportation, education, legal assistance and all other services we require... we would automatically be entitled to a certain adequate standard of every one of these free of charge, regardless of status or wealth.
If we wanted a higher standard of essentials, or wished to indulge in extra things like a night at the movies or theatre, some fun new technology, travel to a far away land for a vacation, or things like that...
Those. Those are the rewards that we might be compelled to work for, were the satisfaction of a job well done and desire to actually do something useful with our own special talents not reason enough. Not to mention social status and respect for being a benefit to society in general.

Really doesn't sound too far from current reality, does it? It isn't too hard to imagine a world in which there are some grocery stores where you don't even NEED money, you can come and get a certain amount of food to take home for free. We technically already have those in Canada, if you think about it. Food banks, we call them. Odd, that it should be called a bank when it's one of the few places in the modern world that does not deal with currency in any way. There would be some apartments that you could live in free of charge, albeit likely comparatively small ones without the best features or design. There would be places where you can get second hand or lower quality furniture that nevertheless is sturdy enough to trust, and fulfills its function as well as you need it to.

And I would hope, as I expect anyone else would, that these minimum standards, the way people can survive even without giving anything back, will continue to improve... I hope that they'll even gain a little bit of ground on the continually advancing cutting edge of technology, as time goes by. Maybe in 2024, the poorest people in Canada will still have easy access to technology that's only two years old, things we haven't even begun to dream up yet, and the richest will have what was invented in their own yesterday.

Now for the other point I'd like to address. "The key question that comes to mind is this: from the fruits of whose productive work do you take the resources to support those who choose not to work in the capitalist sense?" And that is a good question that a lot of people feel compelled to ask people who believe in the ideal of socialism.

It is phrased in such a way as to not be the right question, from my point of view, since from my point of view no-one should be 'entitled' to keep for themselves the entire fruits of their labour to begin with. Human culture simply does not work like that, it involves trade and sharing. Not everyone can cook, not everyone can build, and not everyone can hunt... or wants to, for that matter, for any given of the three. But a skilled cook can cook for a hall full of people, a builder can build many houses, and a skilled and lucky hunter can bring home enough meat for his entire tribe. It is not presumed that we would be better off in a society where the hunter keeps all the meat, the cook prepares meals only for himself and his immediate family, and you don't live in a house unless you can build one worth living in. I realize that the concern is how we can justify asking anyone to provide services even to those who are giving nothing back - why the cook should have to feed not only the person who built his house and the person who brought him the meat for his cooking pot, but also members of the community to whom he owes nothing, who have not exchanged services with him. I'll get to that point a little later.

For the sake of fairness, I can answer the question as asked. Whose productive work? Anyone who is willing to do the work just for the sake of doing it, or with an understanding that it is by virtue of others' similar willingness that they have the things they cannot produce independently and would not always be able or willing to trade for. Love for the work itself, a genuine desire to help people, or a desire to contribute for social validation and bragging rights are all good reasons to work and it is possible to find people who are willing to help other people just because they are people and they have needs and desires to be met, which "I" have the power to fulfill. If this were not true, there would be no volunteers in the world.  Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

The historical solution that most "civilized" societies seem to have adopted to solve the matter of human beings developing specialized skills and needing to be able to share them without general societal disarray and confusion over who was trading what for what has been to try to measure the values of each of these contributions against each other, and use physical tokens to represent value contributed to society and thus earned, versus value taken back from society and thus spent. Thus, currency is born, and we just try to get all the prices for things figured out in such a way that everyone contributes to the group in order to benefit from it, and everyone makes enough to afford the things they need, when they need them.

Oh, what a great circus act THAT turns out to be.

Enter endless arguments about whose services and goods are more valuable, more necessary, higher quality, and otherwise worth more money, endless jockeying for social position and wealth, and a million and one little traps into which we fall by trying to make sufficient quantities of necessary goods readily available to everyone, even the poorer classes. How badly has this completely fucked over the industry of simply growing plants, the first stage food industry and probably the single most essential job in the history of the human race? Not to mention that tokens can be easily misplaced or even stolen, so even if the balances are set to an impossibly ideal and perfect balance, some people who feel that they are not well enough compensated for the work they do may go about trying to correct this by imposing a small re-compensation tax from anyone they find they can get away with taking it from.

But back to the plight of underpaid farmers for now. One might well ask, if one wishes to pose a question, why the businessman and the doctor and the lawyer should, and indeed whether they should, "give up" part of their justly earned wages and the fruits of their labour, for the benefit of the lowly farmer, whose goods are appraised at a much lower price?

But of course, the answer is obvious. Because while some of us may greatly value the convenience of the businessman's newest appliance, be desperate for the defense of a good lawyer, and sing thanks to the doctor for his help fixing your broken leg and your sister's ulcers...
We all, even more importantly, need to eat.

The fact is that the art of civilization is effectively the co-operation of all or at least most people within it, with diverse skills, talents and strengths. We work together, and together produce a world of convenience, plenty, power and security that would not be possible otherwise.

Then the question comes down, as indeed it must, what of the invalid? What of the children? They don't have anything for us to buy from them, they don't have any services to charge us for...

... Does this, then, make them useless? Not in the case of the child, surely, for children grow up and learn skills to share, they contribute when they are older. The invalid? Some of them can be healed (ah, the power of the good doctors at work), and can contribute with concrete skills, but some, alas, will never be able to do so competitively if at all. So what of them? Do we allow them to live half-lives, buy whatever lowly scraps of food, and live in whatever slums, their lesser efforts can afford, until they waste away?

No. We don't condone this cruelty. We believe, as well we should, that simply being human is virtue enough that one should be able to survive with some comfort and dignity by that virtue alone, and it is with this reasoning that we will sacrifice some of the wealth we do not technically need for the good of those who can give nothing back. It is commendable and human of us to be so generous.

There is, however, another problem yet unsolved, one that is much less obvious. It has begun to creep up on us, but we still seem very reluctant to acknowledge it.


Actually, there are two, and they go together.

Firstly, again, there is the matter of how to balance the importance and values of completely different services and products, in order that they be appropriately priced and fair. Here, there is a fundamental problem. The more valuable a thing is, the more dramatically it makes life better, we assume, the more it benefits society when it is contributed, so it should be worth more money. That stands to reason. On the other hand, the more important a thing is, the more important it is that everyone be able to afford it, because it may be necessary for their wellbeing, and the wellbeing of a person is inherently important. Everyone, including people who don't have much money. Therefore, the more important something is, the more affordable it should be, the less money it should cost. It stands to reason.


However, the result of these two perfectly logical conclusions interacting is that the most important, basic and vital parts of society, the things we literally cannot, or would not want to live without... are the things that we reward people the least for providing us with. We will make our inventors and psychologists and lawyers and businessmen rich and privileged... And leave farmers, teachers, doctors, and the producers of things that everyone needs, like simple clothing... poor. So poor, sometimes, as the results of flaws in the system continue to build up, that they may not be able to afford any more than a life of basic essentials. It should be no wonder, then, if we find ourselves short of people willing to do the hardest work, that is the most important... and because of our twisted hierarchy of what deserves how much money... the least rewarded.

The second problem is that as technology progresses, it becomes much more efficient and autonomous. A garden that takes a whole family to maintain can soon be run by one, or else multiply in size and still require the same amount of labour to farm due to advances in weed and pest control, new fertilizers and better tools, like tractors and machines for threshing wheat.

A database of information that once took a dozen people and an entire room to write down, keep track of and maintain can now not only be expanded a hundred fold, but even with all the extra information, be kept running and maintained by just one person using a sophisticated computer, while simultaneously being accessible to literally thousands of people at once without using additional work hours, thanks to the wonders of the internet.

Routine medical tissue tests that once had to be done by eye and took hours can now be automatically checked by machine in minutes, with an astonishing leap in reliability.

Et cetera.

In each one of the cases above, it has become possible to provide the service involved to many, many more people at once... with an actual reduction in the number of people who need to spend their time arranging for it to happen. This has occurred in every single industry, which is very much to our credit, and the number of new industries we've invented now that we have the spare people to power them, while impressive, does not actually fill up the difference.

In the middle ages, it may have been necessary for the survival of a village, that everyone spend long days labouring at their assigned tasks, because otherwise there would not be enough food, or adequate defense, or enough houses, for them all.

We no longer live in that world. The percentage of people who need to be farmers to feed us all has fallen dramatically, and we even have the luxury of more choices in our foodstuffs, with a trading culture so strong that we can get fresh or close-to-fresh produce of almost any kind from anywhere in the world, all year round.

With more efficient practices and better tools as well as many more drugs and medicines and a completely evolved sense of how the human body works, we need a smaller percentage of the population to be doctors to keep us in good health.

Even with inventors, scientists, politicians and government officials at all levels, teachers, plumbers, engineers and the creators and producers and maintainers and servicers of every new invention we've come up with, and the veritable army of customer service personnel, accountants, waitresses, cleaning staff, and salesmen (a job which I am convinced provides no benefit to society at large whatsoever by its existence), there is still a huge block of the population who are not employed in any of these fields... that we can afford to, and do, provide basic services for anyway.

There is, quite simply, nothing that they are actually needed for. There are, of course, always things that could help, new ideas to come up with, smaller, unnecessary but pleasant roles they could fill...

But there arises a new problem. Firstly, that many of these people may simply have no idea what additional benefit there could be for them to provide, worth the time of doing it... And secondly, and most damnably, the rather massive problem that even if someone does come up with a wonderful thing they could do and be good at, and make humanity richer by the doing... there is a very good chance that they will not be able to find anyone willing to pay them to do it.

With the same hierarchy of value and importance that devalues food production and teaching the next generations simply because they are so important that we need them... this same system by which professions jockey and push for dominance, where a million different voices of producers and servicemen proclaim "I am the one worth the most! I deserve the best reward!"... some of the most humane, generous, beautiful activities that human beings can come up with...

...Are ranked so low, that they are awarded no compensation at all.

Consider relief and community project workers in foreign countries, many of whom work without pay, or even pay for their "hero vacations" themselves to help cover the cost of supplies. Consider the fact that the Global Fund to fight AIDS has been suffering considerably for lack of donations from world governments, and a couple of times, has come close to having to suspend vital operations... like giving free AIDS medicine to impoverished Africans. Thankfully, campaigning and philanthropy have kept it above water... so far.

On a less serious note, why is it that skilled, old fashioned craftsmen, makers and repairers of fine wares, need to be shutting down their shops and ceasing business when they are still providing excellent service and goods that should be considered valuable, and the space they are taking up is not needed for anything bigger or more important - no, it's likely there are already empty and unused shopfronts in the same neighborhood?

The answer is that while we value these things, or at least claim to, when it comes to paying the bills, we have to prioritize and assign, decide where our money is going to go. For some reason, our currency, the manner by which we measure and trade and use wealth to ensure that everyone gets a fair share, not only creates inequity but actually causes us to discard some of the wealth we already have, by placing a limit on what we can "afford" which is completely independent of both the wealth we actually have, and the number of people we have available to do work for us creating wealth.

It creates complicated scenarios in which it makes more sense for a company to treat its workers more poorly in order to increase overall efficiency, despite the truth of the fact that workers perform better when treated well and kept healthy, and also despite the moral problems with such a business model.

It creates a world in which we have more than enough food, technology, manpower and skill, all just sitting there, to feed everyone the most delicious feasts we can imagine... and instead of doing that, we obsessively keep track to make sure that no-one gets away with taking more than they can pay for, even if it means we have to throw food away and make it useless rather than give it to someone who is hungry but has no money.

And due to the extensive legal issues surrounding money and its transactions, we actually have a significant chunk of the economy which is effectively entirely dedicated to cleaning up the messes left by its own flaws!

The money system and the requirement that people earn money from employers willing to pay them started out as a good idea to keep things organized, but like the original printing press and European feudalism, it has had its day. We can do better now. We have the technology. The times have evolved past it, and frankly we do not need it anymore. It places pointless artificial limits on the amount we are able to do, encourages greed and hoarding and theft by putting far too much value in tiny, useless coins and papers, and makes just as many problems with value assignment and prioritization than it solves by making sure everyone has to contribute... even though we do not actually need them to.

If we stripped away the redundancies and accounting and sales that money makes necessary all by itself, I am confident that we could care for 100% of the people using the man hours and skill of 10% of the people. We could do it better, more efficiently, and with less grief all around, than we do it now. It would be just another mighty leap forward in social efficiency.

Even if we just restricted the use of money to certain luxury industries like travel and entertainment, and the finest of material things, we could make our society much more streamlined, efficient, and inherently more caring and generous. We could stop making 10% of the population work 40 hours a week and get 50% or more of the population to work 10 or so hours a week, too, if we wanted to. I bet people would be happy to volunteer for shifts like that. I did it myself, for a while.

And that, actually, is my final, and most personal complaint.
Me. Myself.
I am a goodhearted, intelligent, insightful person. I have the skills and the power to cheer and console, to help people through their problems and keep things in perspective. I have lots of good ideas.

And the way things work now, I am not authorized to act on any of them without paying thousands of dollars I do not have to be lectured at for a few years first. Because society "can't afford" the risk that I might do it wrong and hurt someone.

Fuck this world. I want to go home. I want to make home. Here. So damn well fucking let me.