This week in the news--it's all about priorities.

Everywhere I turn, someone is talking about the World Cup-- about the scores, about the plays, about what will happen and did happen and could happen.
They aren't talking about immigration, about the _______ number of children that have come over the border with no adult supervision in the last year, about the 3 countries that feel that sending their children alone on a thousand mile trip rather than keep them at home, about why.
They aren't talking about drones,
They aren't talking about the Ebola outbreak that the WHO is reporting on that has affected  567 people and caused 350 deaths since March  in west Africa.
And no one ever spoke about the school girls that were kidnapped by the fanatical group in ______ or what happened too them, or why such a thing was done.
We had an election, and there were two ballots and two sign-in books.  The Republican voters got to vote on a full page of choices, the Democratic got to vote on three.  I've seen times  here when only the Republicans get to vote in the primaries.  I remember all those scare stories about communism and 3rd world dictatorships where everyone voted, but there was only one person to choose from.  It seemed ridiculous, why vote if there is no choice available, but of course there were still two people under each of those items.  They all had the same platform with the same ideas, but more than one person.
No one was talking about that.
Upskirting is now illegal in one state, and the fact we needed a law for that is amazing and the fact that someone thought it should be alright to do that is pathetic--and I hope the next stupid law limits the number of selfies a person can post per day.  And I'm glad no one was talking about that.
No one was talking about ISIS, and I personally find the idea of naming a Islamic political activist group after one of my favorite Egyptian Goddesses very repugnant.
No one mentioned climate change, not even to deny it was occurring.
And the political issues associated putting on an international event--that reminds me of cleaning a badly neglected house then getting a call the in-laws are on the way--dirty dishes in the dishwasher, stove, refrigerator, dirty clothes in the washing machine, behind the shower curtain, under the sink, clutter in the closet floor and under the bed.  Of course this clutter is homeless people, stray dogs/cats, and other signs of negligected poor people.
But reality is, none of the people I see talking about the World Cup are soccer fans.  A few have kids or grandkids that have played when young,  but they didn't spend their time talking about those games.
I'm confused.  I don't care for sports, although I can egg on the grandchild in whatever she is doing, but it isn't like I care who wins.  I'm just trying to be supportive and sports always have a lot of yelling going on (I hear that isn't true with golf but watching golf sounds truly awful, like watching grass grow.)
So it must be some sort of patriotic thing---the USA team is best--YEA!  And we are a competitive country,  Every little child will tell you we are best, the smartest, the strongest, the most free, the most rich, the best opportunities.  We go down our list and tell ourselves we won at something, and---what does that mean.
What if we don't win the World Cup?  What if we aren't the best at everything?  Only one country can be the best a a thing.  The possibility that one country can be the best at everything is definitely against all odds.
But children are still saying it, and parents and teachers are still telling them that.
Maybe it is time to focus on the effort of doing well.  In stead of this weird need to decry our bestness--maybe it is time to talk about doing our best.  Trying our hardest at what is important to us.  Putting effort into what we do, and realizing that the effort is worthy of our parent's and teacher's praise---not because we are the best, and beat the pants off the rest of the kids in class, but because in doing our best--we became a better person.  We learned the importance of perserverance, thoughtfulness, problem-solving, communication, researcher and even teamwork.
If we win the World Cup, will that make our country one bit better for the rest of us?  Tell the US team, congratulations, cheer your young family members efforts, and--do your best.

What if?

What if the end of the world happened in my lifetime?  What does that even mean?
I live where every other person eagerly awaits the apocalypse.  The day when a giant man descends from the clouds and scoops up the 144,000 then leaves the rest to there own devices as pawns of the ultimate evil.  When I'm feeling mean, I mention that it is possible that happened years ago, but nobody noticed, since 144,000 people going missing off the face of the planet would not make a blip on the radar.  Especially if it happened before electronics.

Here are some facts from the U.S. released in October 2002. (about missing people)

800,00 under 18 a years of age
2,000 a day
58,000 abducted by non family members
115 victims to stereotypical kidnappings that result in ransom demands and death or the kidnapper indents to keep the child.

Do you know any of these people?  I don't.  So what makes any of us think we would know 1 of the 144,000 prophecied to be raptured.
I have been told that number doesn't really mean that.  Something about a literal Jesus floating down out of the sky but a specific number is only a metaphor seems odd to me.  Talk about straining at gnats.
But I wasn't referring to the biblical apocalypse.  I was referring to A massive decrease of life as we know it.  What if a virus, a poison, an asteroid, a plate tectonic event, a human-created thing such as a weapon of mass destruction or just plain hard-headed polluting for the greed of the masses caused the planet to not be able to sustain but 1/10th the life that we presently have---or 1/100th?  What if it killed all the plants or all the one celled organisms of the ocean...or just the mammals.   What if it just made life very hard for 5 years---not depression-hard, breathing-hard, eating-hard. keeping our offspring alive more than a year-hard.  And it affected all species-plant, animal, insect, bacterial---what would that do to Wallstreet.  How would that affect the internet, and the Mall and prime-time TV.
Could humans adapt to that?  Could we keep us all alive?  Would we?
Politicians make statements that clearly indicate that keeping everyone alive is not the goal.  I'm not talking about in the event of a massive extinction-level disaster--I'm talking in regular day-to-day life.  The social darwinism mode is strong in certain parties.  "let the inferior of our species die off and it will improve all our lives"  The problem with that is the false theory that having a hard time with life is genetic.  For all we know, the impoverished illiterate mother of 5 is raising the next great medical research scientist---and because of his/her roots, she is motivated by the right things, not just money.
Humans have always assumed that the end of the world is the end of everything.  The idea that everything but humans continue on has never been considered in any end of the world movie.  I realize that there would be no actors and so no plot, not very interesting to watch.  But I'm betting the dinosaurs weren't setting around imagining a world without them either.
I am not eagerly awaiting the end.  I don't even wish for a depopulating event that puts us back to an earlier time and human saturation level.  I would like to think that we--humans--could quit being so egocentric as to think that we could not disappear from the planet without it being the end of the world.  We weren't here for most of the world's history.  The possibility that our own hubris will end us is not at all hard to imagine.  Most of the people I know couldn't feed themselves without a grocery store, couldn't keep warm without central heat and air and have no idea what to do with themselves without their electronics.  There are children that don't know where babies come from,  that have never seen a vegetable growing in a garden,  that don't know the difference between a polkberry and a blueberry.  We are so dependent upon the society we have created that most of us have no survival skills.
Add to that the strange human predator tendency--for the worst to rise to leadership positions and then tell others to do things that are only good for the ruling group, and we just get more of the same.  Are we humans doomed?  Is there something wrong with our species that makes them incapable of goodness, lovingness, peacefulness?  Maybe.
But we are now, not just warlike to our own species, we have the ability to take the planet back to a much earlier point in evolution, to take it back to insects or bacteria, or all the way back to the cosmic stew that started it all in the first place.  I hope we don't, I want to see my great-grandkids thrive and feel hopeful about their future.  But in the event we humans, with our big brains and creative urges and need to improve our own lives don't find a way to live together with all the other species including our own, then I hope the next round does a better job, maybe smarter but no thumbs or wiser and more loving, or just plain less self-centered.
Here's to hoping we can do better.

Beautiful!?

I am highly influenced by beauty.  It is not necessarily the standard definition of beauty, but I can see or hear or smell or taste beauty and for a little time, I am in a better place.  It is transcendent.  It is miraculous.  And it is everywhere if you have the sense--or senses--to recognize it.

I have noticed that if you say the word beautiful, the assumption is you are talking about a woman or a work of art, and both have to look a certain way.  But every person in love knows that there is beauty in the eyes of their true love.  Every mother knows that beauty is the food-encrusted mouth of their laughing toddler.  And artists--real artists of any medium-know that there is beauty everywhere.  

I like light and shadow, brilliant color, subtle textures, and the way reflections change color and alter the shapes of the things around them.  I can watch grass in the sunlight when a cloud is passing over and be enthralled.  But I also love the sound of chimes, or of 1940's war tunes, when everyone was in love and life was all heros and chivalry.  I have seen cakes decorated so beautifully that cutting them seemed a shame, and tasted muffins so complex in flavor that only my taste buds were aware.  And smells?  It is hard to find a perfume I love, I recently did, and it was too high, and I bought it anyway, because everytime I smelled it, it made me smile.  But other smells, the drifting smell of peony and honeysuckle while walking to the car in the morning, the smell of wood smoke under a full moon in the fall, that funny smell the air gets just after a warm spring rain---time goes, every memory of every time I have smelled that lives in the same moment and all my past crowds in.  Beautiful.

So I have taken to spending most of my time without makeup--not because I think make-up is evil, but because for my whole post-pubescent life, the goal was to look as much like society's version of beautiful as possible.  It was a mask.  I hid behind it.  It covered a million imperfections, and allowed me to interact in a more confidant manner.  Why would I avoid that now?  

Because--why did how I looked have anything to do with anything.  It didn't change my opinions, didn't make me smarter or more creative or more anything.  But I felt I had something to hide.  Not being beautiful to a woman is quite shaming.  I have interacted with women my whole life, and there is a language of beauty.  All the comments about photos mention beauty, or if they are being mean, they mention the beauty of the dress or shirt or make-up or hairstyle.  Women's compliments are about looks, and if they are not about the physical beauty of the woman, then they are sidewise insults---"well, but she is very sweet, she is in good physical condition, so smart with numbers, has good childbearing hips...."  in other words, no beauty, but could be worse.  She is some deficient man's consolation prize.  

And there is the problem, the root of the problem, the issue that causes women to view themselves so narrowly---women are for men.  A woman without a man is a loser.  Women compare their men and decide how valuable they are.  They compete---the winner get the rich, powerful man, the loser (I know what you are thinking--gets the weak/poor man--but no, the loser is alone, and is either strong and powerful on her own --but still the loser, or is weak, helpless, and spends a lifetime searching for a man to complete her.  There is nothing sadder than talking to a 50 year old woman that spends massive amounts of time at the gym and spa and salon, always looks perfect, and can only sigh and wonder when she will meet Mr Right.  

I have met mother's that encourage this mentality, that are so focused on getting their daughters whatever is needed to be perfectly beautiful--hair colored to honey blonde, a dermatologist at 11, a plastic surgeon, orthodontist, personal trainer,,,,,,,because, what could be more important.

How can we be so lost when it comes to half our species?  I have met girls and women that amaze me with their insights, their strength, their creativity, their intelligence, and yet when you ask them about their physical appearance, they are obviously mortified---not because of some great physical defect, but because no matter what they do, they will never look like a model, and therefore are inferior.

The challenge is not to find more ways to tell these people they are smart/creative/strong/talented, the challenge is to find a way to make us all more accepting of the great variety that is all beautiful.  A rose is not the only beautiful flower, perfume is not the only beautiful scent, Monet did not paint the only beautiful paintings, so why does female beauty have to be so very narrow.  And why make it a value for a person at all.  Is not a person valuable just because they are alive?  Just because they exist?  Isn't life--all life--beautiful?

Why not educate the 98%?

I recently heard that my state eliminated the Common Core.  We couldn't have our third graders feeling like failures.  We couldn't let those states that believed in stupid stuff like science and math and literature that was full of heresy and bad words have a negative impact on our precious little children.  Our State Superintendent sided with sending more of the state budget to corporate welfare than raising our education budget.  The good news is--we might still be better off than Texas.

But what is going on in this nation, and other nations that have suddenly set their goals not at pulling the people up but at stopping the progress of the majority.  We have seen such things before.  When slavery was legal, many areas made it a crime to teach a slave to read or write.  And there is a huge push right now in which women of certain fundamentalist religions are killed for trying to get an education. 

A person that is not allowed to learn what is needed to compete with the rest of the community is at an acute disadvantage.  They are set up to be used, overworked for little or no compensation, unvalued and ignored.  

When Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nigeria, or any of those other countries that seem so foreign and backward are in the news for gang raping school girls or trafficking them or kidnapping them or beating them for speaking up for their need to be educated, I'm appalled, incensed even.  But not totally shocked.  Not frightened.  It sounds like more of the same from places like that. No one has ever called those countries free or claimed they were fighters for equality and righteousness.

But then I look at my home, home of the leader of the chief climate-change denier.  Home of the same use of  a fundamentalist religion to control and keep down those that most need education, healthcare and opportunities.  Where are our role models?   Our Governor turned down the Medicaid that would have allowed so many of our population to have healthcare. We are ranked 46th in terms of health. Our medicaid is limited to the disabled, children living in poverty and pregnant women.  Our state doesn't like birth control, sex education, HIV education, or Planned parenthood.  Our state is 4th in teen pregnancy.  We are 39th in education.  22.2% of our students earn a bachelors degree, 7% go on for a graduate degree. Our per capita income is 30,334$ annually--ranking us 47th in the nation.  We are ranked 11th on poverty with over 15 percent living below that threshold.  We are ranked 17th in firearms deaths.  That leads this state to the great position of 43rd best place to live.

So what are our legislatures currently working on?

• Three pro-gun bills have passed in 2014.
• A bill modelled after the Texas bill restricting abortion is in progress.
• Decrease in monies to the Arts and Humanities.
• Legalizing Medical Marijuana( that one will never get anywhere)
• Increasing funding to tourism.poverty and violence is always a big tourist attraction)
• And decreasing the requirements for our students education.  (can we compete when our students have no standards to meet at all?)

What does Oklahoma have?

We have 5 billionaires worth a total of at least 34.8 billion:

Guess what industry doesn't like climate change?

Guess where the tax breaks for businesses were going?

Harold Hamm

Worldwide Rank: 90
Net Worth: $12.4 Billion
Source of Wealth: Oil & Gas

George Kaiser

Worldwide Rank: 109
Net Worth: $10 Billion 
Source of Wealth: Oil & Gas/Banking

David Green

Worldwide Rank: 276
Net Worth: $5 Billion
Source of Wealth: Hobby Lobby

Lynn Schusterman

Worldwide Rank: 384
Net Worth: $3.8 Billion
Source of Wealth: Oil & Gas/Investments

Tom & Judy Love

Worldwide Rank: 384
Net Worth: $3.6 Billion
Source of Wealth: Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores

These 5 individuals are not the problem.  The problem is our elected officials that can't see past the rich people telling them what to do.  When a group of fanatics steal school girls because they don't like educated women, we know who the bad guys are.  Why can't we see that stealing our own childrens educations and futures makes us the bad guys?  Tax the rich at a rate at least similar to the taxes being hefted onto the heads of those that struggle to keep their kids in peanut butter sandwiches.  Look at the statistics, if we are already heading for worst, don't do something stupid that speeds us toward the bottom.  We don't need less education, less healthcare, less birth control.  We don't need more science denial and environmental destruction.  Maybe the only hope this state has is if those rich guys profiting off our ignorance decide to do what they know is right.  Does that ever happen?