Personal Musings on Gender Discrimination and Inequality

In so many ways, this is an amazing time of the year. It feels so peaceful and wonderful to enjoy this time before the struggle to get out in the snow and the piercing cold really settles in and the next few months feel dreary and hunched and dark. So as the semester winds down and we finish up, I find myself reading, contemplating and comparing some of the things learned this semester learned along with my choices, my life and those around me. My thoughts have drifted back to focus more on gender discrimination, harassment, the wape gap and gender inequality at work.

Gender discrimination at work is a challenging topic and how gender affects the work place and work flow is something that I am still not sure I understand even after the readings. The one thing I feel pretty sure of is that I think most of us do not really understand how gender affects them in the work place and how to change it. I have worked for a few different places and have lived in a few different states and even though I have been working for over two decades, I do not really understand entirely how my gender as a woman has affected me in the work force. I can only be pretty sure in a few ways of direct consequences and the readings suggested a few more for my contemplating.

One of the statistics mentioned this semester was that 88.50% of women believe that they have faced harassment and discrimination in the work place. I have dealt with some harassment myself and was fired when I was 23 years old and complained to a supervisor about a co-worker. One month later I was denied unemployment payments even though I had excellent performance reviews for the three years before. I took that experience very personally and only the readings that suggested that some others have been denied benefits for the same reasons suggested to me that the experience might have been more about my gender than me personally. I have managed to work pretty hard to keep to myself and to try and keep myself separate at work because I haven’t wanted trouble for myself and the only female supervisor I have ever had wasn’t a very satisfactory experience for me. I feel like my idiosyncrasies are more accepted by males and so I find that I feel more comfortable in female sparse environments. When I think back, I find that most of the harassment I have received has been from women unless it was overtly sexual… then I tend to have troubles with men. I seem to be doing very well at my current job and I work almost exclusively with men… I wonder how much of my difficulties with women has less to do with my difficulties with communication and more to do with preconceived gender roles by myself and my female coworkers.

I have also found that the gaps in my employment due to family concerns has potentially caused me some significant wage loss… although I do wonder how much of that can also be placed on my lack of easily definable job skills. I do not have a degree and have been trained by on the job or by personal study for many of my jobs. I am definitely a women working in a blue collar job- I am told I am a professional, but my work is fairly physically demanding and I have flexible changing schedules, and even though I am full time, I have very few benefits for it… even my health care comes from the medical marketplace. “Because a blue collar woman learns most of her visible skills on the job rather than in the classroom… she must undergo her training in an extremely vulnerable situation… (as such) there are few visible skills by which the entry level female blue collar worker can be assessed. In situations such as this, where there are few cues available to evaluate ability, evaluators tend to rely more heavily on external characteristics such as gender as a means for judging a worker’s competence.” When I re-read this statement, I thought about how easy it has been for other co-workers to claim my accomplishments for themselves and I can see how my communication challenges combined with that could make me look like an under-desirable employee. I found myself sad but also a more motivated to work hard to stay in the job I am in. I do not make enough, but I am comfortable and respected and that feels pretty awesome and comfortable. Having the stability and less stress makes the financial trade off worth it for me for now.

I too have thought that prejudice and discrimination against women in the workforce has been steadily decreasing over the years so the studies listed (Cox and Harquail 1991), (Stroh, Brett and Reilly 1991) were a bit of a surprise to me. I find myself wondering again how much of my experiences are very much based in my gender and less my personality, behavior, or job performance. I’d like to take more time over the break and chat with friends about this topic and their experiences and see if maybe I can develop a deeper understanding about how it affects me and the people I interact with – both male and female. That seems like a nice interesting survey to conduct. : )

Reading about occupational stereotypes and gender stereotypes in the work place held very few surprises for me. The major surprise was how much I do seem to buy into and live / make decisions based on my acceptable and assimilation of these stereotypes. I hated being a stay at home mom and felt like what I did was fairly useless and my self-esteem was very beaten during this time. In the back of my mind I do not see myself as worth much unless I do have a job and I do tend to see my wage as what my worth as a person is. I do see many occupations as being more gender specific and I can find myself surprised when I am caught in a stereotype assumption in which I have made an unconscious assumption about who someone is based on their work or title (such as doctor) and then discover the person doesn’t fit into the image I made in my mind. One thing I feel like I have picked up from the reading is that while society suggests that the genders are becoming more equal in the workforce, the confidence that women feel (myself included) in being treated as equal is pretty low and we are far more likely to be convinced that each of us is making informed and objective decisions while the organization is making subjective decisions…. I feel like all of us are making pretty subjective decisions and judgments…. We just do not seem to recognize it all the time in ourselves. I have a lot of changing in my thought processes to accomplish.

what are your thoughts and life experience on gender discrimination or harassment? How has it affected your life?

"Ms. Amerikkka" by Aceyalone : Lyrics and Critique

Today's song is titled “Ms. Amerikkka” and was produced and released by Edwin M Hayes, Jr better known by his stage name Aceyalone. This song is off of his album titled “Love and Hate” and it is extremely hard to find and listen to without purchasing the song or album. Every link to it I can find on the internet with few exceptions has either been removed or banned... censorship much? ; ) The lyrics are challenging as they personify and critique the United States of America... and the critique is devastating. Here is the one link that I could find to share the song and the lyrics are below.



Ms. Amerikkka

all right
yo, this song came about one time when
I- I was- I was on a plane back, going back to Los Angeles
coming from somewhere else
and I sat next to this lady and she was telling me something
I don't remember it verbatim,
but I do remember some of the things she said
it was like this-

Life as we know it is about to change
I smell it within the air
the weather is getting strange
drugged up, sedated and
numb from the pain
the sickness in America has spread to her brain
she is no longer fit to make good decisions
she is completely blind and void of any vision
she parties hard and she keeps her conscious mind imprisoned
therefore she's headed for the ultimate collision
she can no longer hide the scars on her face
the innocence now gone is hard to replace
she has no shame, no remorse or any grace
she embraces the devil and she hates over race
Ms. America, the beautiful the free
fallen within the cracks, I wish that you could see
she buried her misery, within society
it's obvious, you have no regard for me

Chorus:
caught up in the belly of America
lost, in the stomach of America
broken down, in the bowels of America
sinking, in the garbage of America
stuffed, in the brain of America
suffering, in the body of America
lying, in the wicked spirit of America
dying, in the old soul of America

Ms. America, you've been a very bad girl
you nearly disgraced humanity in the eyes of the world
vanity has took you over, you're not deserving
the mirror image of your reflection is quite disturbing
she makes so many promises she couldn't keep
she neglected to mother her young, so they don't sleep
they scream out for justice, and then they weep
when out to blame Ms. America, that's what you reap
the audacity of your inventions to rule us all
the tragedy of your intentions to fool us all
you should have gave into nature and to the law
it's only a matter of time before you fall
the things you should of worked out in your first colony
victim of your own advice and your psychology
you've destroyed all morale and the ecology
I'm sorry, but I don't accept your apology

Chorus

Homeless America, so much attraction
has yet to take ability for her actions
we work around within the system and make adaptations
you can let freedom ring, within your faction
how can people still be hungry, when there's a surplus?
suffering within your home, you've made them worthless
damn near police the state, you make us nervous
even though some conform and join your service
you're presidency's the biggest joke, but we're the laugh
always smell the gun smoke, on your behalf
I think I should send a telegraph to your staff
America you're down and dirty, you need a bath
so tell your secret agents, don't be paranoid
this wasn't taught by Socrates or Sigmund Freud
this is simply gods work, you can't avoid
ever nation ever built has been destroyed

caught up in the belly of America
lost, in the stomach of America
broken down, in the bowels of America
sinking, in the garbage of America
stuffed, in the brain of America
suffering, in the body of America
trying, in the good ol' spirit of America
dying, in the old soul of America


Are you still with me... or did I lose you? I suspect some of my readers will not make it this far. Here are my thoughts on this piece of rap and verbal art.....

One of my first thoughts was shock when I tried to watch the video on Youtube and other sites and got the rejection message "can't be viewed in this county." It is a bit of a strange irony that we (the USA) as a nation chastise and bully other nations into accepting free speech that is critical of the government/ ruling party, but maybe we too as a society (or just the powerful class) also silence are critics when they get too close to the mark.) As I read the lyrics and listened to the words, I could see the images of people in my communities and on television; the lines of families at my local food bank, the homeless shelters filled to capacity, the bitter cold keeping the couches of good friends full as well, the individuals who lack health insurance who struggle on without treatment, those whose mental health is tottering and broken who can not get help until they are incarcerated for long periods of time... and then are forgotten when they are released until they begin to struggle again and are forcibly returned... I saw so much and I felt sadness, hopelessness, exhaustion, and anger.

All of my life I have been told how great this country is. From lessons at church where teachers praise me and others for being the most valiant spirits in our pre-existence to be born at this time and in this country- the country that God the Father fore-ordained to be the place of true Christian gospel restoration. From my parents whose patriotism is strong - sometimes extreme- and would express how lucky I was at every opportunity to be an American. To teachers who taught me how some countries do not let girls go to school and might even be forcibly mutilated or murdered for doing things I took for granted like reading. I grew up believing I lived in the best country in the world and that God willed it to be so; in fact, God actively keeps America the top country in the world. It was only as a young adult that I started to see things and hear things that I struggled to reconcile with these past teachings. Experience has certainly changed and nuanced how I see the United States now - both in a larger sense and in the small communities I try to volunteer in. In these lyrics I heard some of the pain I have felt and witnessed from the humanity around me. The title itself tells two stories to me. It feels a bit arrogant for citizens of the Unites States to be called "Americans" while any other citizen of another country on both American continents are monikered differently. Someone from Canada or Mexico, Chili or Columbia is just as "American" as we are yet each of us if asked what are nationality was would state "American" like each of us is part of the cherry on the top of the sundae. I do it as well, but when I hear myself say it I find I feel a discord in my head and I have wondered if one of the reasons people in other countries stereotype us as arrogant, etc... is our attitude which is reflected in what we call ourselves and how we behave. The second lesson I see is that the title expresses some of the failings of how those in power and how our culture treat minorities. America is not a land for the faint hearted female, the financially poor, nor for individuals of color or disability because, whether by intention or design, society tends to isolate, restrict, stress and even cannibalize them. The title expresses to me the hidden and not so hidden racism in our society and in our hearts and the double edged view of how important women are, but only when they conform to specific gender and cultural roles. After all, the United States is usually portrayed by an old white elderly kind "Uncle Sam"... anyone else can be seen as falling short of this ideal.

The line that really stuck in my head out of the whole song was actually almost the whole third verse because as America is being described as female, she is being lectured on her lack of tradition femininity. For instance, the word disgraced isn't a word usually used for the male gender. She is described as vain, not deserving, a neglecting mother who lets her children cry and scream and weep... and does nothing so her compassion is lacking as well. She is blaming, audacious, and tragic... the destroyer and the victim. I really cannot think of any time I have ever seen or heard "Uncle Sam" described in this way and it feels like this song expresses the true fight of women in this country- our services and talents are accepted and incorporated by the men in our lives yet all failures are prescribed to the females involved while men can whip the flung mud off more quickly and easily. It almost feels like the author of the song who has clearly seen and felt the sting of racism doesn't recognize his own biases and discrimination towards women. I know this sounds a little angry and funnily enough I am not angry as I write this- just a little resigned.

What are your thoughts and feelings on this song?

Eugenics in America After 1945: Term Post #2

...Here are some examples:

North Carolina had a sterilization program in place from 1929-1974 in which approximately 7,600 individuals were sterilized with over 70% of those coming after 1945 when the program expanded after World War II. One unique aspect of North Carolina's laws was that they were written allowing people to be recommended for sterilization by doctors, social workers and other government employees they dealt with in their communities and homes. About 85% of those referred for sterilization were women. One guideline for sterilization was if a person had an IQ of less than 70. In July 2013, the state set aside ten million dollars for compensation to the verifiable victims of this program of which approximately 3000 are thought to be still alive.

In the 1950’s, black women in the south became targets of forced sterilization via tubal litigation or hysterectomy, commonly referred to by women as “Mississippi appendectomies,” because women entered hospitals to have abdominal surgery and left unknowingly without their uteri. In 1972, testimony before a US Senate committee brought to light at least 2,000 involuntary sterilizations that had been performed on poor black women who were mothers with multiple children. They were usually told that their appendix needed to be removed and were sterilized at that time or at the birth of a child, especially if the women was unmarried. There is evidence that many women may never have known why they couldn't conceive.

Forced sterilization practices changed and were focused on specific populations in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s through newly established federal family planning programs. Mexican and Mexican-American women were coerced or tricked into forced sterilization at the Women’s hospital of the University of Southern California- Los Angeles County Medical Center. Public concerns that the rise in Mexican immigration was overpopulating the state and purposely expanding state welfare needs was high. The idea that women became pregnant and then worked their way across the American – Mexican border to give birth and give themselves and their new family a secure financial benefit through the various welfare programs available is still an active concern in our present political climate. There is no known number of how many involuntary and coerced sterilizations there were before the federal class court case Madrigal v. Quilligan - a lawsuit brought against a hospital and their doctors by some women who discovered their unwanted sterilization. However, statistics show that elective hysterectomies had a 742% increase and tubal ligations a 470% increase within a two year time frame. At least 140 women shared their stories of being forced to agree or not being given any kind of informed consent at all. Some described situations that can only be described as blackmail. i.e.; I will not give you pain medication to finish your labor and delivery unless you comply. The lead defendant in the court case, Dr. Edward Quilligan, was quoted by a medical technician as stating, “poor minority women in L.A. County were having too many babies; that it was a strain on society; and that it was good that they be sterilized.” The plaintiffs lost their case, but the case did change and created stronger informed consent rules through legislation in California including bilingual language on the consent forms.

In 1955, the federal government changed the way that health care for Native American populations was provided. Depending on many factors, the quality of care throughout the Indian Health System varied considerably due to individual facilities, staff opinions/prejudices, and changes in 'coverage' due to Congressional appropriation hearings and decisions. These changes had some significant benefits as the new program was much better funded which helped increase services and decrease mortality. Another potential benefit which was added was the provision of family planning services. On reservations, Native American women became targets of physicians employed by the Indian Health Services who believed that restricting these women’s reproduction would reduce their poverty and dependence on the state. Through the

sharing of stories, complaints of coercion or harassment, and from research and interviews preformed through investigations, it is estimated that IHS hospitals and their affiliates sterilized between 25 and 42 percent of all Native American women of childbearing age between 1970 and 1976. Even with mandated changes requiring informed consent, added waiting periods and added safeguards, in 1974 more accusations cropped up that IHS staff in some places were not following the new guidelines and questionable sterilizations were still taking place - almost all subsidized with federal funds. Evidence shows that these types of experiences not only changed the relationships between Native Americans and the government/Indian Health System but also caused significant changes in an individual’s life and their standing in the community, as well causing economic and familial harm- some marital relationship were also severed over the procedure. In 1976, Congress passed the Indian Health Care Improvement Act which gave tribes the right to control Indian Health Service programs and there is no evidence that inappropriate sterilizations have happened after that time.

In case we believe that our society’s beliefs and behavior has changed since the late 1970's, we have other more recent examples. In 1909, California was the third state to pass a eugenics sterilization law and over the years had sterilized around 20,000 patients or around 1/3 of all the sterilizations in the country. That law was finally repealed in 1979 after a lawsuit by several women who had been coerced or forced into their own sterilizations. Yet, at least 148 women incarcerated in four California prisons were illegally sterilized in the years 2006-2011 costing the state $147,460 for the procedures. One of the physicians, Dr. James Heinrich, has stated that the practice of sterilizing female prisoners saves the state money because the patients would no longer have “unwanted children as they procreated more.” Auditors found in those cases that sometimes paperwork was altered to look like compliance with current laws was achieved and in many cases, no informed consent was attained. On September 25, 2014 California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill prohibiting forced sterilization in the state.

That the United States has not been able to shake the ideas and prejudices that informed and created the original Eugenics movement. Today eugenical ideas and procedures are still officially permitted. Voluntary sterilization for therapeutic or for reproductive reasons is a great blessing for thousands of people and should be accessible for those who need it. However, its availability gives eugenic proponents the tools they need to pressure individuals to give up their dignity and human right to reproduction. Some women may lose that right without being told of the procedure or are given false information such as it is reversible. There is even incidental evidence that federal money is being spent on experiments and science that are clearly eugenic in nature. In the end, eugenics is still very much successful in America. I am aware that I personally fit several of the ideals for eugenic sterilization –I am so myopic I am considered legally blind, suffer from celiac disease, and have two other severe medical issues as well as PTSD, and severe sensory/ anxiety issues. I have given birth to a child that also has problems with celiac disease, has sensory problems and had seizures for seven years before outgrowing them. And yet, my son is a wonderful human being and he is well liked in his community. He is smart and compassionate in spite of his disabilities and my life wouldn’t really feel worth much without him. I have chosen to not have any more children and being able to make that choice for myself is one of the most wonderful things I appreciate in my life. I am hopeful that as society recognizes the individual worth of all individuals, may the concept of eugenics pass away… and rest in peace.

pictures from: http://www.carolinapublicpress.org/9854/house-passes-eugenics-compensation-bill, http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/the-american-eugenics-movement-after-world-war-ii-part-1-of-3/Content?oid=2468789&storyPage=3, http://gloriamolina.org/2014/01/15/looking-back/, http://www.quora.com/Native-Americans, http://www.uvm.edu/~lkaelber/eugenics/SD/SD.html, http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/12/opinion/la-ed-sterilization-female-prisoners-california-20130712, http://www.examiner.com/article/illegal-sterilizations-forced-on-women-california-prisons, http://rt.com/usa/167660-california-illegal-sterilization-women/

Eugenics in America After 1945: Term Post #1

The study of human history shows the many achievements and journeys of our race. From our humble beginnings, through the development of culture, religion, communities, hierarchy and power structures, to what and who we are today... well, as a less-than-humble commercial suggests- 'You've come a long way, Baby!’ The path to the twenty-first century has not been smooth nor painless and, like our predecessors, we view ourselves, our lives, and our world as an improved and civilized place with the human race as the most intelligent and virtuous beings on it. Looking at the history of the human race, I see many recurring themes that are a part of every society; hope, love, beauty, want, etc. The theme of self-improvement or change that benefits ourselves and, in turn, society has been a reappearing idea that became more pronounced after the Enlightenment and the Renaissance along with the concept of improving groups of people to improve society. However, like all virtues, self-improvement or personal development can come with a dark side that is exposed when the virtue itself is placed on a pedestal or idolized without regard to the thoughts and rights of those we consider 'lesser' than us. When this happens, any noble or virtuous ideas are shown to be the shallow horrors that they can become ... the virtue is pulled and stretched out of its normal view to a pained and stretched mask of what it actually is. During the twentieth century, the themes of human breeding, genetics, prejudice, self-improvement and social progress collided to serve the virtue of better breeding and health of human beings. Eugenics, which means 'well born', was created in

America. This movement was so strong and large that it was able to spread into other cultures and countries before its horrors and Machiavellianism tendencies became apparent enough to create a sizeable opposition that attempted to crush it. In response to the common belief that eugenics was no longer an important movement after World War II, I will discuss briefly the history of eugenics in the United States before WWII and then analyze the way the movement changed after the war. I will show that the ideas behind eugenics are still alive, well and being acted upon in our society today. Recognizing the way the movement itself has adapted to our changing culture and its opposition helps place us in an informed position to focus on the fearful and reactive areas of ourselves and our society so we may work to create a more lasting and peaceful change in our thoughts and fears. Hopefully, that will help us change how we act upon our fears and prejudices and how we justify acting on them in our communities and society.

The idea of eugenics is a simple idea with more complex answers. The word was coined in 1883 by Sir Francis Galton who advocated the scientific regulation of human breeding to ensure that 'better' genes had a larger chance of predominating in the continuation of the human species. Eugenics encompassed the progress of medical practice and scientific thought and recognized the inseparable relationship between medicine and social progress. To be blunt, the idea of the eugenics movement was that better breeding would lead to a healthier population and was an effective way to deal with social problems. It provided a comfortable way to rationalize people's prejudices about race, poverty, etc... and also suggested that 'undesirable traits' could be minimized within a few generations if people were only brave and good enough to work towards it. Undesirable traits that were thought

to be correctable through eugenical reproduction included epilepsy and other physical disabilities, alcoholism, tendencies towards rape (rapists), and other criminal behavior, promiscuity, and more. Races and immigrants that were not of Anglo-Saxon heritage were also of 'suspect' genetic material and poverty was thought to be a characteristic of genetic inferiority. Always a controversial movement, eugenics has had its loyal adherents since its conception and even the tragedy and knowledge of the German Holocaust in World War II didn't change those who believed and followed its tenets. Before the war, it was common to institutionalize the ‘feebleminded’ or those that those in power worried about reproducing. The rationale was that the only way to stop a living being from reproducing was to limit its movements, monitor it in risky situations, or make it biologically impossible for breeding to take place. Institutions for those who were ill, the ‘feebleminded’ or those who had medical difficulties were created to isolate and remove those individuals from active society. Laws were passed that forbade marriages between people who had specific medical or mental health problems. However, locking people up costs a lot of money and the inability to remove everyone from the community that fit the criteria (due to lack of funds or institutional space) made the original eugenics process less effective than its early adherents wished. Sterilization allowed the individuals to be released back into their local communities to support themselves while not crating any more individuals like ‘them’. Because of that, sterilization became the easy, cheap, and irreversible weapon in the eugenics supporter’s arsenal.

The Holocaust did shift some of the popular views of how eugenics should work, but didn’t change any of the eugenic and popular thoughts of a large part of the populace nor did it change the most popular procedures that were used. In 1927, psychologist George Ordahl explained at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco that if it was possible to calculate “the economic burden of the moron” that [was] paid for by taxpayers, “every patriotic citizen would become a eugenicist in search of methods of prevention even more drastic than any now known.” The tone may have softened since WWII, but not by much. Dr. Charles Gamble wrote in 1947, “Tomorrow's population should be produced by today's best human material” and he complain[ed] that only one in forty-one people with severe mental illness had been sterilized, leaving dozens of others to spread defective genes. In 1966, C. Lee Buxton published an article titled

“The Doctor’s Responsibility in Population Control” in which he reminded his colleges that “medical responsibility demands more action than just passing resolutions and making recommendations...” and advocated sterilization as a solution to the ‘problem’ of unwed mothers on welfare. In his view, the problem was multiplying “because the medical profession has controlled the death rate but has done very little about the birth rate.” The exact number of women- for women were by far the more common victims of eugenics- involuntarily sterilized after the end of World War II into the 1980’s remains unknown due to the lack of collected statistics, listings in medical records of coerced sterilizations as ‘voluntary’, the social and reluctance of women to file formal complaints, and the ignorance of individuals who never knew or were never told that they had been sterilized. (The reason I stop at the 1980’s is due to a lack of information on current trends.)

Euthanasia programs never gained popular ground in the Unites States, but did have their supporters before WWII. One egregious example is Dr. Harry Haiselden who advocated and practiced denial of life saving treatment (even of newborns) and thought it was acceptable for an institution to give inmates tuberculosis through infected milk because only those with ‘defective’ genes would get the disease and die. In the end, after the Holocaust, sterilization was the procedure of choice and was perfectly legal through the decision in Buck vs Bell decided by the Supreme Court. This court decision has never been overturned and has been used to support involuntary sterilizations since its publication and over the last sixty years. Here are some examples....

pictures from: https://mediachecker.wordpress.com/2013/11/10/bill-gates-its-gods-work-monsanto-vaccines-eugenics/, http://www.uvm.edu/~eugenics/whatis1.html, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton, http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-horrifying-american-roots-of-nazi.html, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/05/darwin_day_in_may_buck_vs_bell003669.html, http://galleryhip.com/american-eugenics.html, http://365daysofthis.blogspot.com/2013/02/define-eugenics.html
eugen

Eugenics in America after World War II /1945 : An Introduction to the Term Paper

I know a few people have been waiting for this paper so here it is! I will need to break up the paper into a few posts but it will give a very basic outline of eugenics before World War II and our influence on other countries… and then move into how eugenics changed and what groups were affected by these legal policies. I do give current examples when I was able to find some and I am hopeful that after I share this research, maybe we can have a discussion about how to create community awareness and change in our areas…..

Here is my abstract paragraph:

The study of human history shows the many achievements and journeys of our race. From our humble beginnings, through the development of culture, religion, communities, hierarchy and power structures, to what and who we are today... well, as a less-than-humble commercial suggests- 'You've come a long way, Baby!' The path to the twenty-first century has not been smooth nor painless and, like our predecessors, we view ourselves, our lives, and our world as an improved and civilized place with the human race as the most intelligent and virtuous beings on it. Looking at the history of the human race, I see many recurring themes that are a part of every society; hope, love, beauty, want, etc. The theme of self-improvement or change that benefits ourselves and, in turn, society has been a reappearing idea that became more pronounced after the Enlightenment and the Renaissance along with the concept of improving groups of people to improve society. However, like all virtues, self-improvement or personal development can come with a dark side that is exposed when the virtue itself is placed on a pedestal or idolized without regard to the thoughts and rights of those we consider 'lesser' than us. When this happens, any noble or virtuous ideas are shown to be the shallow horrors that they can become ... the virtue is pulled and stretched out of its normal view to a pained and stretched mask of what it actually is. During the twentieth century, the themes of human breeding, genetics, prejudice, self-improvement and social progress collided to serve the virtue of better breeding and health of human beings. Eugenics, which means 'well born', was born and This movement was created in America and was so strong and large that it was able to spawn into other cultures and countries before its horrors and Machiavellianism tendencies became apparent enough to create a sizeable opposition that attempted to crush it. In response to the common belief that eugenics was no longer an important movement after World War II, I will discuss briefly the history of eugenics in the United States before WWII and then analyze the way the movement changed after the war. I will show that the ideas behind eugenics are still alive, well and being acted upon in our recent history. Recognizing the way the movement itself has adapted to our changing culture and its opposition helps place us in an informed position to focus on the fearful and reactive areas of ourselves and our society so we may work to create a more lasting and peaceful change in our thoughts and fears. Hopefully, that will help us change how we act upon our fears and prejudices and how we justify acting on them in our communities and society.

pictures from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Eugenics_supporters_hold_signs_on_Wall_Street.jpg, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

“It's Your Funeral”... and Thoughts on Humanity's Continued Search for Itself

I have never had any interest in westerns and the culture that surrounds them. In fact, I think I have only considered them something that might be worthwhile because my grandfather likes them. So when I discovered this film on the syllabus I didn’t really have much to look forward to. I recognized John Wayne from pictures and posters and country 'accents' that you can buy in stores and that's about it really. So I thought that the majority of my fun with the film happened with my experience of purchasing it. I must admit that I enjoyed my time at Bull Moose with the clerk who took me around the store looking for it. He walked me around while he wore a really crazy hat that flopped around and when any of his co-workers asked what we were doing he always answered with the same phrase, “Us? We're searching for the Searchers.” It was a bit funny :)

So I got it ordered, picked up and sat down to watch it with more than a little feelings of just blah. The first five minutes convinced me that I was in for a few hours of difficulty, maybe not boredom, but not really any interest either. I got a large glass of grapefruit juice and slouched down on the couch to keep watching but also so I could continue to watch the snow coming down outside the window and the sun slowly dissolving into the dark. I then spent two hours watching the saga of Ethan Edwards and his search for his missing niece named Debbie Edwards after she was stolen by a Comanche Indian raid. He traveled back and forth for over five years with a companion named Martin Pawley- an adopted young man who lived with and grew up with Debbie and her family.

“And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also.” - Matthew 2:8

Ethan was a very interesting character. All of his opinions and thoughts bordered on arrogant and... for lack of a better word, macho. His obsession- the only word that makes sense in this case- with looking for his niece was confusing when you looked and comprehended his thinking of what makes family as well as his thoughts and anger towards the “Comanche' – anger that appears to come from past experience and dealings with some individuals from that Indian group. Family, or 'kin', to Ethan is a very simple thing. Blood and blood only makes family. He can't seem to see it any other way. His views on women are very stark as well – if you live with Indians or accept them, then you are damaged and shouldn't live. These stark, unbend-able views make his obsession with finding his niece even more challenging to understand... after all, why search for a girl for years and then wish to kill her when you discover a women who is married to an Indian chief? How can a man compartmentalize his feelings so clearly that he is unable to recognize the inherent clashes his own views will cause?

Martin - “They raised me”
Ethan - “That don't make you kin”

Funnily, enough... that does make you 'kin' in my book. I see family as those who stick by you, who love you, who look out for you and with whom your life would not be complete. I have many family members who share my blood, but I know people who share my blood and who really are not family. I have family in whom no related blood flows, but in all other ways they are my kin and I cannot see them as separate. I grew up with three grandfathers and while a child should never have a favorite, I did and still do to this day. Grandpa Carlile is the grandfather that I think about, I miss, and I know I will feel the loss keenly when he is no longer able to be a part of my earthly life. Sometimes, people remind me that he shares no blood with me- that he is my step-grandfather... but that label isn’t who he is and doesn't change who or what he is to me. If he had been kidnapped and lived in another culture for a while, I wouldn't hesitate to take him back... no matter what. As with all obsessions, Ethan puts everything he's got towards his plan and desire to find and rescue Debbie, but is unable to see the reality of what he wants. When he finds her, she can't live up to his expectations (can any obsession do that?) It takes more experiences and time before he is able to learn not only about how to understand and deal with the reality he faces, but also to actually understand himself. I would wish him happiness with his new understanding of humanity and even family, but as he is really a fictional character.... I will simply try to remember the lessons of the character.

Brad – “They gotta stop sometime. If they're human men at all they gotta stop.....”

Ethan - “No. A human rides a horse until it dies and then he goes on foot. Comanche comes along, gets that horse up... rides him twenty more miles... then eats him.”

Another problem that plagues Ethan is his discrimination and dislike of Native Americans... the Comanche in particular. He is unwilling for a great deal of the film to listen to or recognize Martin as being a human on the same plane as himself (Martin is one quarter Native American). His attitude of dehumanizing the Indians allowed him to see anyone who fit in with them as bad, not worthy of even living... damaged beyond repair. This movie was made over sixty years ago and this is a problem that we all still fight – as individuals and as a society. When someone angers us or does things that we do not approve of, we strip them of all the positive traits that they have... making them almost one dimensional with only negative qualities and stereotypes. This makes it easier for us to justify the poor treatment ans thoughts that we have toward them. It is this way of dehumanizing and 'othering' different people that has caused every genocide in this world. It is how we justify discrimination and violence towards others. And it is how Ethan justifies his attempt to kill Debbie when he finally finds her at the end of his quest. Sometimes I think what we are really looking for is to appease and justify our mistakes – by blaming others or hurting them. It is our search to understand and love ourselves that can be our way to peace... or the path to hatred and scapegoating. Martin Pawley finds himself unable to stop searching for his sister and follows Ethan over the country for years – sacrificing his potential wife Laura as well as good financial prospects- even when it is pointed out to him that is sister isn't his 'kin' because he is adopted. Even when he is told that the Comanche chief Scar murdered his mother, he is unwilling to focus solely on revenge... the life of Debbie is still more important. How many of us sacrifice so much for another person? For someone who many even today would say wasn't even family?

In the end, I sat back on the couch and thought about Ethan and Martin. I thought about how Ethan feels like the side of us that is angry and fearful and courageous and doesn't really think... and Martin is the 'one who follows' and pure love... charity. He feels fear and he feels angry, but he channels it and uses it to try and do what he feels is right for others and not what is necessarily all right for himself. Like the Super- Ego and the Id, parts of the same consciousness fighting to be the dominant partner.... which part of us will win the battles that we chose? Will we approach those who believe or behave differently than us with curiosity and tolerance... or will we allow ourselves to act out our fear and hatred with ourselves and our behavior on others? We are given these choices everyday... sometimes several times a day.... how we act says a lot about us and our character. If nothing else, I learned that the struggle to be tolerant and open is a problem that we have struggled with for centuries and we do not appear to be any closer as a race to understanding. I believe that Heavenly Father gives us more information and knowledge when we are ready for it – both individually and collectively. No wonder so many people think that God has stopped talking to us... we as a race are really slow to learn so how can he give us more information? In the end, Ethan Edwards is right: it is our funeral. And how we chose to get there is our choice most of the time. So what choices are you making? Are you choosing love and tolerance... or are you choosing anger and fear? In what ways are you judging your fellow humans poorly? If you have seen this film, what are your thoughts? I probably won't watch it again... I will actually probably send it to my grandfather who will probably love it. But I am glad that I watched it. :)

Sideswipes of Ideals and the Clash of Life, Experience and Hope: Malcolm X

With the exception of knowing the name- having heard the title many times in my life, I knew almost nothing about Malcolm X. So as I sat in class and the lights were dimmed I was prepared (I thought) for learning and to discover more about the man that I knew so little about- a shame as a historian, but I will admit I am woefully inadequate on almost any topic on American history; that is semi intentional and a long story. I have seen a documentary by Spike Lee before and found it phenomenal. And each film that I have seen in class has provoked so much thought that I wondered what I would gain from this one besides a better understanding of the man's life. Here are my thoughts...

The start of the film with the burning flag was a really potent image. The flag- whether it is a stamp, a name, a picture, iron on art, etc... makes a very specific statement. It is a loaded image that creates a picture no matter who looks at it and in many cases makes a political statement as well. For some, the flag is a symbol of pure nationalism- some love America to the point of blindness and the flag symbolizes this feeling... the feeling of power and strength, the assumption of God's blessing on this, the best country. Even that God fits a profile- white, Christian, silent and unchanging through the years. For others the flag is a symbol of a country that they love and feel loyalty for, but they are also able to recognize that America and its flag can also be seen in very negative ways not only by some of those who are protected by its laws, but by many around the world. The image of the flag is seen for what many see as its true colors... the symbol of oppression towards many in the world... it's citizens, other states...anyone that isn't useful or in line with what 'America' wants. It's hard to attack these ideals and governmental policies, so people attack it's image... and that is the flag. There are many ways to insult or desecrate the flag, but burning appears to be one of the most popular. By total destruction as flames quickly like over the sewn threads and they vanish into smoke that is pulled up towards the sun. So, as I watched this image, I felt the pull of both sides of the argument.... those that I know who cannot see anything but their idealized vision of the world and those who have felt the pain and oppression that is the flip side of nationalism. And there is no middle ground- because individuals will force you be be part of one side or the other. I do not allow myself to use the flag or its images on anything. I do not use it on stamps, hang it on the wall, or even use decorations that use the colors or patterns that suggest or remind. I have been told by people that my dedication to that 'idea' is treasonous and that I am ashamed of my country, but I see a very fine distinction between love of my country and it's ideals... and the reality of what it truly is. What is truly does... and what it has done in the past. So I felt that pain and that anger as I watched the flag... and as it slowly began to burn, I didn't need to hear the world to feel the suffering, the pain and the anger. I could see it grow and build as the flag burned... a flame of heat that might never be extinguished...even though its object has vanished into smoke and ash.

So many times I heard the word 'boy'... and finally I got it. When I was in high school I used to call male classmates 'boys' if I thought they were immature or acting that way. One of them was black and the few times I called him a boy, my kind teacher would pull me aside and tell me I couldn't do that because it was racist. And I would walk away really confused and frustrated. I have never considered myself a racist and I couldn't see how the word boy could be racist... The N word, yes... but boy no. I see it now. More than twenty years later I understand and I am really horrified by my lack of understanding. As a silly white girl, I didn't get it and as an older but still silly white women I know see a glimmer of understanding and I am filled with the shame and remorse. Tyler, I never meant to really hurt you. I never saw myself as being racist or making any comment about your skin at all. I saw myself standing up for myself and calling out immaturity when I saw it. I am truly sorry. I wish I could take those words back and I will admit I do not use them anymore. Since I couldn't understand why they were racially offensive, I just didn't use them anymore. I learned new words that were probably more effective and I still use those. I know of no way to make amends for my ignorance and foolishness; in fact, I suspect that my new understanding shows how immature I was and what a small child mentally. I ask for your forgiveness and hope that whatever pain I caused was small and hopefully gone.

Elijah Mohammed : The question is -who are you?

All of us ask this question to ourselves at some point in our lives... and how we answer it determines our whole lives. His choices changed his life and the lives of many. Just as our choices change our lives. I know a few people who seem lost and I am unclear if they can answer the question that Elijah Mohammed asked. Sometimes I am not sure that I can honesty answer that question. There are times when I feel very confident of the answer, but the jargon that spews forth from my mind is a list of labels and if you think about it.... no person can be summed up in labels nor should they. Aren't labels really a way of wording or acknowledging a trait; a piece of the whole, but how can a label or lots of labels encompass the whole? I am a woman, used to be a wife, a religious observer, a writer, a mother, a celiac... and yet, none of those labels tell you much or give you a clear image of who I am, what is important to me.... anything. What a powerful individual Malcolm X was... to question and question and to work to really understand himself and develop his ideas. The self awareness and control that requires is something that many people never develop- it is certainly not one of my strong suits.

"Whites can help us, but they can't join us. There can be no black/white unity until there's first some black unity. We can not think of uniting with others until we have first learned to unite with ourselves. We can think of being acceptable to others until we have first proven acceptable to ourselves..."

This is a really strong statement and a hard reality. Back at the beginnings of the women's movement, many of the leaders that we are able to look back to realized that women would never be able to get any rights as long as any men were also denied rights. That is one reason that many feminists worked and fought for civil rights for African Americans. Malcolm X understood something very essential. Until we can look and work together in our smaller groups, we can easily be divided. Look at any group of people – your church congregations, family, school mates, etc... How easily they are challenged and develop divisions, cliques, and outcasts. Look how easily the American government talked the country into going to war with Iraq – You're with us or against us, patriot or traitor, etc... no middle ground. When those that are in power want something, it is easier to distract and the less powerful majority with other things and such definitive statements. It crushes dissent, freedom of expression and gets many of us to focus on things that are not really important. It's how many of us use our votes to help people enter government who will actually make choices that hurt us and our families... we are distracted by other things and issues that keep us chasing our own tails. We can see this disunity now between not only the races and genders, but between those with economic disparity, health issues, religion, etc...

"I told you to look behind the words and dig out the truth...locked us in chains, 100 million of us, broke up our families, cut us off from our language, our religion, our history.... "

My last thought is not a comfortable one. As I sat and watched the life of Malcolm Little unfold to the adult Malcolm X to the close of his mortality, I found the same question running through my mind. Martin Luther King Jr. was a wonderful man and did some great things. I mean no disrespect to him by my next question. I wonder why we as a nation celebrate Martin Luther King and his achievement... and gloss over Malcolm X. My thoughts as to why we as a nation do that are not very polite or politically correct. I wonder if we celebrate King because we feel more 'comfortable' with him. He is easy to like and his message while hard came through a man who in many ways was nice and easy.... Malcolm X can not be seen in rose colored glasses very well. If you put both the men side by side, Martin Luther King is much more palatable for a white audience- he was Christian to boot. And so we celebrate him and what he stood for and forget some of the things that he did that we wouldn't find acceptable such as his womanizing. (Malcolm X was clearly a more responsible and focused family man.) I guess I wonder if we accept him more because we are trying to turn MLK into a 'good black person' or make him more 'white'. That is not possible to do with Malcolm X... and so as a culture we push him aside. I wish I knew more people of color so that I could ask them: What are their feelings on both men and which one do they feel more comfortable with? Which one matters more when they look at history? And which man do they think was right? A long time ago, I heard the story of the first black mayor of some city whose surname if I recall was Ford. He said that in his job, he had to be 'fairer than fair' and couldn't just try to balance things. He had to always make sure that the balance card leaned more towards his 'white' voters so that they didn't feel he wasn't caring for them and choosing the 'black' population only. How many of our politicians (mostly white) worry about that? Malcolm X was accused of being a black supremacist and a racist and I cannot agree with those labels- He didn't want to destroy or damage the white race... he only wants the black race to have the same choices as the white race.... and the same consequences. It seems that even in our modern, tolerant world.... we haven't changed as much as we would like to think. I feel a bit like a small child again and the world looks different and stark and harsh. I wonder if we will ever be able to get past race in America.... I wonder...

Term Post #2 : The Irish Potato Famine / Irish Genocide

From time immemorial, rulers have tried to manipulate the past, discipline historians and control collective memory”

The Irish potato famine is generally agreed to have been between the years of 1845-1852 with around one million deaths and the population of Ireland shrinking by at least twenty percent between deaths and loss by emigration; there are some suggestions that almost one million people also emigrated for other countries during this time with most headed to the Americas. The history between England and Ireland for over six centuries has been filled with hostility and the unfortunate circumstance that the good fortunes of one country usually spoke of the bad situation of the other. At the beginning of the famine, Ireland was under the control of England and its parliament and most of its land was controlled by English landlords who didn't live on their land; in fact, for the seven hundred years before the famine, the Irish people had gradually become tenants in their homeland with the English as the major landowners. In 1690, the British government passed penal laws in Ireland that restricted the rights of individuals who practiced the Catholic religion by prohibiting them from holding public office, getting education, owning land, participating in civil activity, and inheritance rights... pretty much the majority of things that helped people and their families rise out of poverty. By 1843, Ireland's demands for the repeal of their union with England- and the strength behind that demand- was seriously disquieting to the British government. Many commissions/ special committees that looked at the situation in Ireland right before the genocide/famine had nothing positive to say about the circumstances on the ground there: “Without exception their findings prophesied disaster,” or as stated by John Mokyr, “population grew unrestrained, continuously exacerbating poverty, thus making the resolution of the problem by a catastrophe ultimately inevitable.”

And so the straw broke in the form of the fungus Phytophthora infestans also known as potato blight. The potato crop had become the food that the majority of the Irish population depended on for their basic subsistence as almost two-thirds of the population depended on farming for their survival. The fungus was quick working as one day the plants would look healthy and then the next… the plants were dead. If the disease to the potato plants had been it, then the outcome might have been very different and this disaster wouldn't be seen as a genocide. What makes this challenge a man made disaster was the politics and economics that surrounded and enlarged it. As the crop failed and people went hungry and began to starve, the political decisions that England made compounded the problem. Part of the blame for the political decisions that were made can be focused on the attitude that the English populace and politicians held towards the Irish population. Between the racial animosity, the religious difficulties and the English perception that the Irish were a more primitive people, the difficulties between both cultures in some ways was inevitable... it was also a common misconception that the Irish poor took a perverse pleasure in degradation and squalor.

The British prime minister at the beginning of the famine, Sir Robert Peel, stated “There is such a tendency to exaggeration and inaccuracy in Irish reports that delay in acting on them is always desirable.” In fact, the skepticism of the British government in believing or understanding the depth of the crisis- whether intentional disbelief or not- would prove fatal to many. Another challenge was that the land owners (who were mostly English) continued to force optimal growth and work out of the Irish creating large amounts of food that were then exported to England. Some figures suggest that several ships left Ireland daily laden with food for England and in some of the worse times of hunger, the exports were protected by military escorts from the hungry populace. By some accounts, enough food was shipped out of Ireland to England during the famine to sufficiently feed around two million people. As far as I can ascertain, this was the first time in history that a country during a famine where food was a dire need for the population didn't stop exports of food as well as allowing imports of food in. When relief was sent by England, it was not only insufficient but was only a fraction of the amount of food shipped out as well as food that was not easily used in the rural areas of Ireland.

There are many things that can be seen today that we can trace the roots back to An Gorta Mor (the Great Hunger). Even with the pressure and the discrimination that was committed in the cause of removing the power of the Catholic religion and to try and force the population into Protestant leanings, the constitution of Ireland which was ratified in 1937 stops short of calling for a national religion, but does acknowledge the leading role of the Roman Catholic Church. Even the language of discussing the famine says a lot about how it is viewed by the speakers- many people call it the Great Irish Potato Famine, while the Irish call it the Great Hunger. The culture itself changed as even the language of choice shifted from Irish to English and some of the customs disappeared- it is the modern Irish and nearby historian who continues to try and pull the past forgotten traditions, folklore, and customs back into the collective consciousness. It was also right before the famine and during it that the agricultural practices were changed from grain to 'pasture farming' which persisted on after the tragedy itself. The diaspora of thousands to America and other lands helped spread some of the Irish culture with its people, but also removed it from its central place- in both the lives of those who left and in the lives of those who stayed behind and managed to survive. Ireland also was unique among European countries at this time and after due to the severe population loss as all other European countries experienced rapid population growth during this time frame and the years after. The seeds of Irish independence were well watered during the famine and within a few years, Ireland was able to gain her independence from England. And today, both countries are still working on an understanding and tolerance of each other and their differences.

During the time of this indirect or direct genocide (depending on which point of view you take), there were many people who spoke out about the famine, the deaths and the devastation. One of the most well known was the speaker and writer, John Mitchell. As one of the first men to recognize and name the famine as a genocide, he was also one of the most outspoken in his hatred of the British government and its policies towards Ireland. When Parliament and those men ruling England became frustrated with the rhetoric of Mitchell and others, they passed a law called the Treason-Felony Act. This law was meant to try and censor the kingdom's critics in Ireland by creating a mechanism for 'legitimate' punishment. A few people were prosecuted under this law, but most were acquitted... John Mitchell was successfully convicted and was sentenced to fourteen years transportation to Bermuda. He managed to escape and made it to the United States where he continued his writing and vocal rhetoric for the complete independence of Ireland. In a tract that he wrote in 1861, he said, “I have called it an artificial famine: that is to say, it was a famine which desolated a rich and fertile island that produced every year abundance and superabundance to sustain all her people and many more. The English, indeed, call the famine a 'dispensation of providence;' and ascribe it entirely to the blight on potatoes. But potatoes failed in like manner all over Europe; yet there was no famine save in Ireland... The Almighty, indeed, sent the potato blight, but the English created the famine.” Strong words indeed – no wonder the English government tried to silence him. Censorship continues to this day as both Irish scholars and others portray the famine as a mostly natural disaster and play down any role that the British government had in its beginnings and long lasting effects and mortality.


Thoughts or comments....? :)

Our Debt to the Enlightenment...

So, I was sitting in class this week and we were asked what we were thankful for in our lives that is directly a result of the Enlightenment. I was very surprised when I really thought about it and realized that I am so blessed as so much of my life and the things I take for granted can be traced back to the philosophes and the time historians have titled the Enlightenment. I know that I am able to do many things and even go places safely because of the humanist ideas, etc… that came about during this time. I figured I would take a moment to mention a few examples that came to my mind.

One example is medicine. I was premature at birth and only weighed around five pounds. I had breathing problems and was ‘slow to thrive’. I am now a happy healthy adult that is too hyper for many and for the most part I don’t have reminders of my feeble beginning. If I had been born in the 1600’s there was some understanding of the human body, but the understanding of how the body itself was really formed and interacted with itself was only discovered and really started to develop during this time. My lung challenges alone would probably have been my death warrant because so little was really known. As a celiac, I would have had a very limited life because this disorder is really a disorder where the body attacks itself in the presence of unacceptable proteins and these sorts of complicated chemical reactions and transactions in the body are still being discovered today- during the Enlightenment they were just beginning to understand the existence of these reactions. Also, chances are that food itself would have been an issue for me. If all I could eat was bread, then I could eat it and feel sick… or starve. Not too many options there. If I was sickly I would be less likely to survive to adulthood, much less likely to survive childbirth and, as evidenced by my beautiful son, my children would be prone to medical challenges as well if they were able to survive. I take for granted that I can have a quite variable diet and can find food that I can eat almost anywhere that I can afford and enjoy. I also am able to have medical treatments that were only a dream forty years ago, but wouldn’t have been possible without the desire and work of some many people –mostly men, but women shouldn’t be ignored- during this time.

As a woman I can attend school, I can own property, I can become divorced or married as I please… all ideas that came about or started during this time frame. During this time, voting rights for more than just the elite began to be discussed and I can –and do- exercise my right to vote whenever I am able (much to the consternation of my extremely conservative parents… They still can’t figure out where they went wrong) As the writers and elite of this time became more humanist and allowed boys of all families to be able to look at education, it allowed for the doors to be opened wider for me. I can walk down the street wearing anything I want (almost) and I do not worry about being jailed, beaten, or even killed for my ‘audacity’ or ‘promiscuousness’. I can chose a religion (or not) based on my conscious or the voice of my own mind and heart, and not on the particular law/government/church in power at the time. Heck, I can study science in a room of my peers of both genders. I can have a nontraditional job for my gender- and while we definitely still have challenges with that it our society, it certainly is much more possible!

I think the thing I am most thankful for impact wise is the ability to question anything. To be able to ask questions about my environment, people, topics of all sorts… and not only be physically safe but have conversations and be able to form my opinions through study, observation and my own moral guidelines. Before the Enlightenment, as a woman, I didn’t have a lot of options for what I could do with my life. I might get more options if I was wealthy and had an understanding husband (because I would probably have had to have one to have continued to have more options), but those options would have necessarily been limited by the facts of percentages. After all, very few men were wealthy and as women could not own money or property with very few exceptions, only women married to wealthy and ‘tolerant men’ could have had more options for their lives. (And even then, their options were still limited in comparison to the options I now have for choices in my life.) At least once a week, I can have a conversation with a friend of family marriage on something difficult; gay marriage, human rights, universal health insurance, discrimination of women in the workplace, what is modesty, etc.... I enjoy them and I can have them and agree or disagree appropriately as I see fit and learn, think, and study out what was said. I would really feel like my life was incomplete with out that aspect of conversation in my life.

When you look at your life and look back at all the changes that came with that time frame, what are you most grateful for? What things changed that you don't see as benefits in your lives? What do you remember about the Enlightenment from your past classes? :)