One of the "Boys"?

I saw this meme on a friend’s page and initially, I simply laughed and agreed with it. Then I realized something: running outside barefoot shouldn’t be associated with any particular gender.

Give me 100 random young people, with shoes, barefoot, or even without feet, between the ages of 4 and 9. Put them in an outdoor setting- trees, rocks, dirt, grass, flowering plants, sunshine, insects, wind- the whole nature thing.


Some of those kids will, and should, immediately start exploring.


Some of those kids will, and should, hesitate at first but eventually begin to explore.


Some of those kids will, and should, remain still.


Some of those kids will, and should, feel so shocked or overwhelmed they may start crying, getting angry, huddling up, trying to escape, hitting themselves or others, or having some other reaction as equally energetic as the kids in the first group but in the opposite direction- away from the new stimuli.


Among these four groups, some children will, and should, engage with others, while some will, and should, prefer to do things alone. Some will start in one way and end up choosing another.


None of these children are wrong. I used the phrase “will, and should,” on purpose.


As adults, we don’t all react to the outdoors the same way, and neither will our children. What we MUST do is adapt our approaches to each child’s response. If the moment feels right, we can offer a “stretch” action to try something else. That’s part of the amazing art of teaching others.


The first response needs help with safety; they cannot just act on their impulses. Their exuberance needs to be tempered with an understanding of cause and effect and the interconnectedness of everything. They need to learn that their volume and energy can negatively impact others (including other species), so if an adult suggests they adjust their behavior, there’s a good reason: everyone and everything deserves a place to thrive.


The second and third responses need time and space to adjust. As adults, we can offer them suggestions, but often, simply providing a safe zone for observing is enough. Their experience may not seem “enough” to others (both peers and adults may be tempted to think so), but it can be enough for them. We can gently test the waters with these children, sharing our observations or questions to draw them into the situation a bit more. But again, it’s more about providing a safe place for what each kid needs to and can experience. Sitting with a friend telling stories may be just what they need, and that’s a valid and beautiful thing.


The fourth response is likely feeling completely unsafe and/or overwhelmed. Adults need to focus on ways they can reduce those sensations and perceptions. Kids reacting in these ways may need a vast reduction in what’s coming into their brains and bodies until they can reach a level of control and calm that will allow them to try again.


It’s vital for us adults to understand that moving from one response to another is entirely normal. A young person in the first response group may shift to the third, or even the fourth. They may start alone in the first and end in a circle in the third.


None of these kids are “bad”.


None of these kids are “good”.


I never mentioned gender, age, or religion.


I never called out any of these kids on appearance, physical or academic abilities, or who their parents are.


They are all just kids. Each beautiful in their own way. 
I'll also suggest that what I describe here about children in nature should be things we apply to our adult lives in our daily lives. <3

Ahead of the 2024 DNC

It’s Sunday, August 18, 2024 (Edit: my cat wouldn’t let me finish on Sunday so this is being finished and posted Monday.) and I just read the daily themes set for the convention that starts tomorrow. I’m going to write my thoughts simply based on each of those 4 basic main ideas and see how I may or may not mesh with what unfolds in the upcoming days.

Monday: For The People

I have to look at today and into the years ahead when I read that line. We must redefine what that phrase means to us because it really is about us.  Who the hell is this “us” and what exactly do we want? What is that “For”?

There are about 345 million of us people in the US. Sometimes, I wish we’d all take a few minutes and just think about who they all are- who WE all are. 345 million children, parents, siblings, grandparents, cousins, babies, elderly, teenagers, and neighbors. 345 million roles being played every single day. 345 million laughing, crying, eating, breathing, pooping, and peeing people. Our physical details may differ, but I believe we all want to be loved, valued, and have a sense of purpose. We are all here, together.

Tuesday: A Bold Vision for America’s Future

I saw an article in the news today that people died in a landslide in a garbage dump in Uganda. The US has environmental and humanitarian crises of our own, but we don’t face anything like that. I bring it up because Ugandan people are just as valuable as any one of us. People are people and there are over 8 billion of us around the globe (yes, the world is a 3D sphere). 

Americans, Palestinians, Indonesians, Ugandans, Russians, Israelis, Ukrainians, Potawatomi… 

Today, there are 195 countries recognized by the United Nations. We Americans must work within all those people and the countries they all find themselves in. We must invest continuously in global connections and diplomacy and seek mutually beneficial arrangements- for the people first, then the countries because we (like many other countries) do have peoples in the US who aren’t equal parties. Perhaps we’ll be able to help negotiate an agreement that will finally get everyone to a 2-country solution between Israel and Palestine. Hopefully, we can find ways to get leaders of countries like Russia to respect borders and negotiate issues rather than grab what they want. The world lived through European and American colonization and we should understand that and fight against allowing those types of injustices to expand once again. 

To me, a bold vision for America is one where we use our brains and our hearts above all else and only consider fists as an absolute last and worst option. A bold vision would have us see EVERYONE, including the poorest of the poor anywhere and everywhere (here and around the world) as valuable human beings. And as valuable beings, if someone needs help and they aren’t seeking to control and manipulate others, we work to get them that help.

Wednesday: A Fight for Our Freedom

So, if I take the 2 previous ideas, that this country should be for ALL, and we should connect positively to all people around the world, how can we achieve those things? By institutionalizing modern interpretations of our rights and responsibilities and a modern understanding of key concepts like “liberty and justice for all”, “all men are created equal”, and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.

National corporate laws and international agreements to properly tax and regulate corporations with an emphasis on transparency? Yes. (See Christina Park’s Corporate Personhood: A Limit to Corporate Empowerment) Guarantee a certain level of health CARE for all US citizens, including medically-based reproductive care that encompasses all current medically-approved practices (yes, even abortion)? Yes. Implement the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to help everyone with the right can vote? Yes. Support and modernize the rules and regulations of public schools to ensure all children have a safe place to learn about this wonderful world we inhabit? Yes. Why not add 2 years of free post-secondary education as well? Establish a national weapon safety system and include mental health and social-emotional learning funding in that universal health CARE system? Yes. Maybe even a tax on weapon-related goods & services to help fund that. Revamp our law system to put significantly deeper penalties on crimes with weapons? Yes. Revamp the law system to slash the inequality of punishments and eliminate for-profit prisons? Yes. Yes. Yes. Incentivize clean water, air, and soil practices in general and move our agricultural support away from monoculture monoliths and factory farms? Yes.

Thursday: For Our Future

The first 3 days all support the final day’s goal:

For = today’s actions.

Our = everyone and everything.

Future = together.

That's where I'm at today. Not the most detailed and clearly not the most educated of essays, but it's me.

To all the white guys in my life...

Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site

Dear white guys.

I truly hate the descriptive “white” as it is used to define some people. I’m using it today because I’m being forced to. Perhaps being forced will end up working as an effective tool for me. Coercion has always left doors open to big things, hasn’t it.

I’d like you to close your eyes and picture the people in your life who could be described by the term “white guy”. In today's understanding of it, try to get a good feel for who exactly that term could apply to in your circle. If it includes yourself, put yourself in there and just go with it. There’s no judging here- you’re just applying a label. You’re not actually making yourself or them into something different or changing who they innately are. Please remember that.

OK, so all of us have some folks in our minds who could get this label? You probably based your decisions on their looks or maybe you even went so far as to consider DNA. You might have used “balls and penis” to define “guy” and maybe you decided anyone whose family hails from Europe is what you call “white”. Maybe. Because over time, different parts of Europe weren’t considered “white” here in the US. Even today, folks whose ancestors were from Spain are labeled “Hispanic” and not “white” on a lot of forms, correct? And folks who came from some areas of Asia look “white”. Did you lump anyone you know whose relatives immigrated from Russia as “white”? Let’s not forget Jewish men or anyone who has historically “passed”? White? Does your vision of “white” include an assumed layer of Protestant Christianity? Hmm…

Let’s just leave that alone for now and move on. Much has been said in recent decades and into  2024 that the United States needs to go “back” to something. Some say we need to follow the “original” Constitution.

The Constitution was written incredibly vaguely to neither support or attack specific people. The definition of people was left to each state mainly because some of the dudes who wrote the Constitution and people they knew owned people. One thing we do know is that every single person who wrote the Constitution was defined in their time as 2 things: white and male. How did they get to these positions of power? Land and material goods manufacture. How did they get these things? Through generational wealth and the systems they and their families (headed by men) brought from Europe.

What about women? No term in the original Constitution applies directly to women. The document does not define state or federal citizenship. When it was written, women had little to no guaranteed rights or independence. We must remember that the colonials came from Europe and that was a predominantly patriarchal, land wealth-based system.  It was possible for a white woman to be independent, but rare. 

On July 11, 2024, Glenn Grothman, a Republican representative from Wisconsin said that if Trump wins reelection, the U.S. should work its way back to 1960, before “the angry feminist movement…took the purpose out of the man’s life.”.

Wisconsinite Matthew Trewhella preached to his Waukesha County congregation in 2020 that, “When you see sodomy running rampant, when you see women in government, when you see men behaving like effeminate little squirrels, judgment is in the land,”. Mr. Trewhella has become a prominent part of the Republican Party of Waukesha County according to a Propublica article posted by Wisconsin Public Radio on July 10, 2024. A quote from this article:

“To him, that [the law of God] means outlawing abortion and same-sex marriage, or even violently resisting the government if necessary, noting in his book that there are times when men “must redden their swords.””

What is Mr. Trewhella’s vision when he uses the term “men”? I am assuming that Mr. Trewhella is including himself in this group that must “correct” things with swords. Is he open to anyone with balls and a penis? Or is his definition of “male” and “men” affected by other things like skin color, ethnicity, religion, sexual preferences, favorite foods, preferred music, sports appreciations… The filters can go off into the weeds. Regardless, thoughts of Mr. Trewhella are being supported by a local political party.

In Mr. Trewhella’s and Mr. Grothman’s worlds, what if EVERYONE in your “white guy” category HAD TO- an actual societal expectation on them and obligation- HAD TO assume these roles or face shame, legal punishment, and/or familial disowning:

• Be a Christian of good standing

• Marry a woman

• Have children

• Never get divorced

• Financially support said woman and children for the rest of your life

• Ensure your children marry, have children, and your male children financially support their women and children

• Defend with arms or otherwise your means of supporting your woman, children, and income and that of other men locally and nationally

• Ensure everyone in your family maintains their statuses as Christians in good standing

As I recall seeing and holding my sons for the first time, I cannot imagine thinking to myself in that moment that the above list of things would be their goals. If they freely chose one, some, or all of these things would be one thing. But to have that brief list define their potential value and role? And in conjunction with that, have my own life and everyone else's (who in your world would fall outside that group of white guys you had in your mind?) structured by the ramifications of all that?

Absolutely not.

I’m reminded of Zen priest angel Kyodo williams and my thoughts on her On Being talk that I listened to and wrote about in 2018. That essay is called Spring and the Death of Denial.

If we work in a state of grace, we can face and transform beyond the past to the point where these artificial labels and denials of universal truths will fall away.

On the Timeline of History

The takeover of local, state, and federal governments that included Wisconsin's era of Scott Walker, voting restrictions, and Act 10 was calculated and progressed in planned, concerted steps.

With that 10+ year success, which was partially cracked only this year with the gerrymandering conviction and mandated redistricting in WI, the next plan being leaned on is Project 2025, which is populated by a host of individuals associated with former president Trump.


It's vital to understand this:

A new, long-range, and detailed political plan is in place and its scope in both depth and breadth deserves a title Version 2.0. It is being packaged as being for the modern patriot and that the entire system, not just the current administration, is King George.

I don't accept that. To do so is to say the Great American Experiment is over.


Yes, I do find myself wondering if I'm wrong and my descendants will carry the stigma that colonists who remained loyal to the crown did, as did their descendants.


I hope not. I don’t believe the facts validate this fear. When I look at the list of changes being promoted, I cannot support them. Dismantling the Department of Education? Rolling back regulations enforced by the EPA? Reversing Health & Human Services policies on reproductive rights (including birth control) and LGBTQIA issues? Making it OK to quickly fire and replace career civil service employees if they are objecting to an administration?


I believe those Americans grabbing for the mirage being sold want to belong to a group that promises a piece of imagined glory that no one else can provide as their reward. That method of manipulation is a tried and true one. We have to remember that those who lived in the South who didn’t own people didn’t fight that system because they actually hoped to someday be in that position of wealth and power themselves. They were incentivized to support slavery.

Project 2025 was written by 35 main authors and hundreds of contributors. Twelve of the main ones listed are:

- Rick Dearborn for the White House Office

- Russ Vought for the Executive Office of the President

- Christopher Miller for the Department of Defense

- Ken Cuccinelli for the Department of Homeland Security

- Kiron K. Skinner for the Department of State

- Lindsey M. Burke for the Department of Education

- Bernard L. McNamee for the Department of Energy

- Roger Severino for the Department of Health and Human Services

- Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., MD for the Department of Housing and Urban Development

- Gene Hamilton for the Department of Justice

- Jonathan Berry for the Department of Labor

- Diana Furchtgott-Roth for the Department of Transportation


You can get the full chapter and author list on the Heritage Foundation website.


Don’t get me wrong, I applaud anyone who has the foresight and organizational skills to design, build, and maintain a detailed action plan. It shows dedication and determination to set out one’s desires and plans and follow it. I certainly hope all political parties do this. And all businesses, charities, etc.


It’s all about the actual content and how one seeks to achieve one’s plans. That’s the problem here. The people behind this project supported the 45th president and they are writing this plan to ensure that his next time through doesn’t face any inside roadblocks as was seen in the first or outside ones.


This plan *could* be applied under any “conservative” presidency. 2024, 2028…whenever. It’s built for whoever wants this machine to work for them and them for that person. If that person fails this group think, I am sure they will be abandoned and a new figurehead would be found who will.

Racism, sexism, cronyism…all the -isms where here when “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” was written, and they are still here today. We’ve changed- thank goodness. We need to evolve much more- please, may it be.

I have faith it’s possible within the system we have that’s lasted now for 248 years.


If we don’t give up.


Please vote in every election you are eligible to vote it.

My Problems with Math

We're in this together.

Many forms of mathematics leave me dazed and confused. That frustrated my father and he attempted repeatedly to assert that I believed *women* couldn’t do math. 

It wasn’t true. No. 100% no. The fire of his belief always took me aback.


Unlike some, I cannot compartmentalize groups of people based on some specific trait. Why not? It would be so much easier to say:


Women can’t do A. They can do B.

Black people can’t do A. They can do B.

Indigenous people can’t do A. They can do B.

Non-binary sexual orientations or genders can’t do A. They can do B.

Those with disabilities can’t do A. They can do B.


Those A’s and B’s vary by the descriptives pulled by those making these judgements. The A’s can be (and have been) things like going to high school, going to college, running a company, owning a home, living in a town, getting loans, going to the bank across town, getting married, driving, going to this school, being a doctor, earning a living wage, and more. What are some others you thought of?


After I started this list, I realized that there really isn’t a “Men can’t do A. They can do B.” category. Then I had to add a condition: Is there an assumed filter or bias (By me? By all?) on that term “Men”? Is it only *white* men? Do they have a “can’t” or would it be more accurate to say theirs is closer to “don’t need to”? Or “don’t even consider doing”? I wonder.


I haven’t yet touched on the problems relating to the subjects in the can/can’t statements I sketched out: Women. Blacks. Indigenous. LBGTQIA. People with disabilities. For example, race is a construct. It’s emphasized by those in power to maintain that power. Gender was also used to be a “solid” way to divide us into 2, until our knowledge expanded and the problems of this “gimme” of categorization and ranking became apparent.


What is my point? It takes effort to change our thinking, but there are goals we should work into our realities:

I can’t do math well. But anyone who can should have the opportunity to fly with their skills. (Colleges have banned a host of categories of people over the years. Today, affordability is a huge hurdle.)

I can get married. Anyone who wants to should have the opportunity. (Different races weren’t allowed to marry each other for quite a while. More is needed.)

I can get a divorce. Anyone who wants to should have the opportunity. (Women used to not be allowed to divorce their husbands. No fault divorce is in jeopardy.)

I can’t run fast. Anyone who can should have the opportunity to fly with their skills. (Different people have been not allowed to compete in all kinds of sports at different times over the country’s existence. Why do we still have male/female categories? Couldn’t we have a range of inclusive leagues with different abilities?)

The list goes on and on. We’ve never been perfect as a country. We have evolved. Both of those statements are true and the additional truth is that we can and must do a lot more to be bigger people. It won’t freeze us into the inability to act. It will allow us to maximize our potentials and alleviate hurt. It won’t make us lose our identity. It will help us see our species more clearly.


Humanity is capable of both exquisite beauty and monstrous ugliness. Each new day is an opportunity to move the needle a bit further. Let’s remember that each dawn and each sunset.