My husband is a disabled Vietnam veteran who receives benefits from the Veteran's Administration each month. This is what happens when something goes wrong while in service to our country. We promise to take care of our veterans. They take care of us and, in turn, we take care of them.
Unless you're a Tea Party Republican. Those people don't care about anyone. It's almost as if they're living in an alternate universe that's bleeding into ours. They don't make any sense and clearly do not understand what governing is. These mentally challenged individuals believe that they can control spending by not raising the debt limit. Trying to reason with them only falls on deaf ears. It's a fairly simple concept, really. I'm sure they all have credit cards. If they don't pay off the balance each month, they have to pay, say it with me now, interest or finance charges on the remaining balance. Or, say you finance a car you want to buy. You'll pay a certain amount of interest on that loan. Same thing happens when you buy a home. It all adds to the debt you owe. That's what the debt ceiling thing is. Voting each time to agree to simply pay the bills we've already agreed to incur is stupid and pointless. We owe the money. And although I know that old school Republicans exist, they're either too intimidated by these people, or they just don't care anymore to stop them. And now the Tea Party Republicans want to bail on our fiscal responsibilities. How can they hold office if they don't understand this? If this were a business, they'd be fired.
Somehow, they've even managed to incorporate the idea of freedom, into the equation. Unfortunately all they've really accomplished in my estimation is reducing freedom to an unrecognizable slogan or buzzword. And yet, they seem to be the biggest control freaks around. They want to force women to have vaginal ultrasounds before having an abortion, a constitutionally protected medical procedure. They know they can't win elections so much anymore because of how insane they are so they re-draw the districting lines or find other ways to suppress the vote. It's always in areas that typically vote for Democrats, so I guess they think if they stack the vote in their favor, they'll be back in control.
But let's look at what they do when Republicans (Tea Party or not) are in control. They lied us into two wars. They ended the Assault Weapons Ban. They crashed the economy. They enact laws typically on the state level that endanger workers' rights and women's rights. They seem to favor only protecting corporations instead of protecting people. They don't believe in climate change and they don't care if the earth is polluted out of existence. They pay homage to the 1% because that's who fills their election coffers. And then there's the racism. That filters into everything. It's part of why they voted to reduce the SNAP program by almost 40 billion. And don't even get me started on immigration reform or the whole, corporations are people my friend crap. This is compassionate conservatism at its finest.
And now they want to shut down the government unless we defund the Affordable Care Act. Never mind that the ACA is covering kids until they're 26. Never mind that pre-existing conditions will be covered. Never mind that it's going to save people money. Never mind that millions will have health insurance for maybe the first time ever. Never mind the facts, because as we all have seen, the GOP doesn't ever let facts get in the way of decision-making. Instead, they make stuff up out of whole cloth and expect the rest of us to buy it hook, line and sinker. Well, we're a whole lot smarter than that.
The country is in a mess. Crazy people always come out of the woodwork when these things happen. Many of them were elected to Congress. If we don't get them out of office, our country will never get back on track. The American people deserve better than these lunatics. We cannot stay home in 2014. We have to stand up and tell these morons that we deserve better than what they've given us. Vote.
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Monday, September 23, 2013
That stupid Koch brothers' Obamacare ad..
So just when I think the Koch brothers couldn't go any lower, they do with this ridiculous ad that suggests that Obamacare is like being sexually assaulted by your government. I'd love a couple of minutes with these two pathetic excuses for human beings, let alone men, to tell them what I think of them. But there's no point. They're old now. If they can't understand why this was offensive and cruel, then they're idiots to begin with. Talking to them will solve nothing and will change nothing.
But I'm going to say it anyway. No. Obamacare is not like being sexually assaulted by your government. I'm a sexual assault survivor and I should know. Trust me. Those of us who are, know the difference. To even suggest this is beyond over the top. They have gone too far here. Too far.
Did they think it was funny? Because it's not. It's creepy and sick. Like they are. To try to scare college aged women from buying insurance that can help them stay well is shameful. They should be embarrassed. But they're not. They're liars. Where are the parents? Are letters pouring in to the Koch brothers' offices? Are parents protesting outside their homes? How dare they intrude in our children's lives this way, presenting lies in a way that only confuses the issue.
I know what it's like to be sick while attending college. I spent a year and a half being so ill that I probably shouldn't have even been there. I had very little money to live on and I couldn't take proper care of myself. My parents didn't care what I was going through. I remember when I wanted to take a summer off and just work instead of doing both and my mother imploded. So they didn't help me at all, but what I did have was their health insurance. Without that, no telling what would have happened to me. It was court ordered due to my parents' divorce. Otherwise, I would have had nothing.
I watched that ad in disbelief. When it became apparent that this was rape oriented, I became so nauseous that I nearly threw up. Here's the thing. No matter how we're assaulted, the experience stays with us forever. In my case, I'm an incest survivor. All I could see while watching that commercial was my perpetrator's face. If that's what I saw, can you imagine how other survivors reacted? Can you imagine the terror? I can. Because I felt it. And I haven't been calm since.
There is something seriously wrong with the people who made this ad. It never should have been allowed to be shown. What they're doing to innocent survivors is horrific. We've been through enough. We don't need to see stuff like this. I don't care who doesn't like the Affordable Care Act. I would have preferred single-payer. Can you imagine the ads they would have run if that had happened?
These scumbags used rape to sell a lie. And if people believe that lie, they will suffer for it. And why this isn't a criminal act is beyond me. So sorry you can't handle a black guy as our president. He's more intelligent than you; he's more savvy; he's more compassionate. Most importantly, he's a father. He actually understands what it means to BE a father. Get over it. He won twice. He's all the things you aren't and never will be. And if we're lucky, we'll keep moving in this inclusive direction and the bad guys will never be in power again.
Because that's what all of this is. All this upheaval. The war on women, on cannabis, on children, on seniors, on the poor, add any name you want..it's all about the last vestiges of what is passing for conservatism these days. It's all about lying for the purposes of regaining control. They're evidently not satisfied with the drama they've created, they want more. Well, we're tired of it. A week from now, we'll find out if the idiots are going to cause the government to shut down. And if it does shut down, what then? Will we point our fingers at the appropriate people? Or will we enable it for the next time?
But I'm going to say it anyway. No. Obamacare is not like being sexually assaulted by your government. I'm a sexual assault survivor and I should know. Trust me. Those of us who are, know the difference. To even suggest this is beyond over the top. They have gone too far here. Too far.
Did they think it was funny? Because it's not. It's creepy and sick. Like they are. To try to scare college aged women from buying insurance that can help them stay well is shameful. They should be embarrassed. But they're not. They're liars. Where are the parents? Are letters pouring in to the Koch brothers' offices? Are parents protesting outside their homes? How dare they intrude in our children's lives this way, presenting lies in a way that only confuses the issue.
I know what it's like to be sick while attending college. I spent a year and a half being so ill that I probably shouldn't have even been there. I had very little money to live on and I couldn't take proper care of myself. My parents didn't care what I was going through. I remember when I wanted to take a summer off and just work instead of doing both and my mother imploded. So they didn't help me at all, but what I did have was their health insurance. Without that, no telling what would have happened to me. It was court ordered due to my parents' divorce. Otherwise, I would have had nothing.
I watched that ad in disbelief. When it became apparent that this was rape oriented, I became so nauseous that I nearly threw up. Here's the thing. No matter how we're assaulted, the experience stays with us forever. In my case, I'm an incest survivor. All I could see while watching that commercial was my perpetrator's face. If that's what I saw, can you imagine how other survivors reacted? Can you imagine the terror? I can. Because I felt it. And I haven't been calm since.
There is something seriously wrong with the people who made this ad. It never should have been allowed to be shown. What they're doing to innocent survivors is horrific. We've been through enough. We don't need to see stuff like this. I don't care who doesn't like the Affordable Care Act. I would have preferred single-payer. Can you imagine the ads they would have run if that had happened?
These scumbags used rape to sell a lie. And if people believe that lie, they will suffer for it. And why this isn't a criminal act is beyond me. So sorry you can't handle a black guy as our president. He's more intelligent than you; he's more savvy; he's more compassionate. Most importantly, he's a father. He actually understands what it means to BE a father. Get over it. He won twice. He's all the things you aren't and never will be. And if we're lucky, we'll keep moving in this inclusive direction and the bad guys will never be in power again.
Because that's what all of this is. All this upheaval. The war on women, on cannabis, on children, on seniors, on the poor, add any name you want..it's all about the last vestiges of what is passing for conservatism these days. It's all about lying for the purposes of regaining control. They're evidently not satisfied with the drama they've created, they want more. Well, we're tired of it. A week from now, we'll find out if the idiots are going to cause the government to shut down. And if it does shut down, what then? Will we point our fingers at the appropriate people? Or will we enable it for the next time?
Thursday, September 19, 2013
I wish Ron Paul would stop giving homeschooling a bad name..
When my boys were at the end of 7th and 4th grades respectively, we decided to homeschool. I didn't like the environment they were in. The older boy was in a junior high school that had become so violent that parents were staying at school in shifts to act as monitors. One little boy didn't show up for his last class. He was in my son's home room at the end of the day. The teacher finally went to look for him and found him in the commons area sitting on a bench, bloody and crying. It seems that six eighth grade boys surrounded him and beat the crap out of him. I refer to him as little, because he was smaller than many of the kids there.
In addition, the school had a policy of bathroom hall passes if a student needed to use the bathroom during class. You could get a pass ten times a year. The school was huge and if the kids had to go back to lockers to get more books or anything and had a class at the other end of the building, there wasn't enough time to do all of that and not be late to class. So, my son was told to use up a bathroom pass if late or pay a quarter to the teacher, or pay a fine or push a broom at lunch when his ten passes were gone.
Now, I found all this irritating. Mostly I found it irritating because my son didn't tell me about any of this until he needed money to pay the teacher for being late to class. This was at the end of the school year. And then that funny E word kept coming out of my mouth. You know the one. Extortion. And yes, I used that word when speaking to the vice principal. So imagine my surprise when he retaliated by bringing my son into his office and reading him the riot act about reporting this to me. Then he demanded to know what teachers were doing this. So, my son told him exactly who took money from him and who didn't. This resulted in his Science teacher accosting him in the hallway, yelling at him for telling that she did that when she didn't. So, once again, my son had to be the adult in the room and carefully explained to her that he specifically said she did NOT do this.
Now, over at the grade school where my younger son attended, he was in the TAG program. That's the Talented and Gifted program. My older son was apparently one point off on the testing, probably due to the cold he had that day, and was being watched for future inclusion in the program. (I didn't know that until I spoke with the program director, because no one tells parents anything) So, he's in the fourth grade, being taught by a kindergarten teacher. Yes, that mattered. She was opposed to TAG, even though the entire class was taught the same lessons. The TAG kids were just given separate assignments. So it had stopped being a pull out program. But she felt it was intrusive and preferred to treat the fourth graders as 5 year olds. Note to anyone who hasn't spent time around gifted children: you don't do that.
So when I asked the boys if they'd like to homeschool, they jumped at the idea. My oldest was relieved. My youngest was thrilled because he didn't apparently like his chair at school. We didn't do this because we were mad at the government. We didn't do it because we wanted to have some fundamentalist religious curriculum. We just did it because I didn't think they received the education they COULD receive, or be treated with the respect they deserved. Because my boys were always the students teachers wanted to have. They were nice kids. So no one was happy at the school district when we did this. It was a statement on their worth in their view. I guess in some ways that's true. But I don't think as Ron Paul does that parents are failures for sending their kids to public school. Not everyone can do what we did. Or should. The boys had good teachers for the most part when they attended public school. We live in a small town though, so I'm sure that had something to do with that. Parents were involved in their kids' education. We just decided to try something different.
And it worked! The boys discovered interests and I was more of a facilitator than a teacher. We adopted mostly an unschooling approach, with some directed subjects that they would need to learn skills for college. Math was Saxon math. History was Zinn's, A People's History of the US along with Lies My Teacher Told Me. Okay, I'm a liberal hippie, and yes I disagree with Mitch Daniel's attempt to eradicate the world of the works of Howard Zinn. I re-took Writing 121 and the boys used that as their writing curriculum. We read Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. They both became interested in computers and the oldest ended up graduating from college with a dual math/computer science degree and the youngest graduated with a degree in computer engineering and a full minor in computer science. They both work in their chosen fields.
The best thing about homeschooling is that your children will have the chance to explore their interests and develop their natural love of learning. They will understand that learning is not something that is done TO them, but BY them. It's their responsibility to embrace education. And if nothing else, as long as they learn that, then it's a complete success. My oldest started taking classes at the community college when he was fifteen. The youngest began attending classes at sixteen. They could do that under high school concurrent enrollment. My oldest was the only one to do that, however. They both took their GED tests at sixteen and either worked in the case of my oldest, or began attending college full time. By the time both were seventeen, they were in college full time.
One last thing. My boys are martial artists. We ran a kenpo school and they trained with us. I had no qualms about their ability to defend themselves should it become necessary while at school. One problem. The school district didn't share my viewpoint. If either of them had been involved in any altercations, they would have been expelled and arrested. The martial arts part has nothing to do with that. It was just a policy of expel, arrest, and sort it out later. I didn't like that. Here we were, training kids to defend themselves and at the one place they would likely experience an attack, they couldn't use what they had learned. And I'm not just talking about my kids. I'm talking about all the kids we taught over the years. So you know, when I hear this ridiculous second amendment argument about needing to have assault weapons so that we preserve our freedom, I have to laugh. Or scream. How do you tell a child he or she cannot defend themselves? How can school policy not preserve the rights of the victim? What message to they really want to send here?
People homeschool for lots of reasons. Sometimes they do it for Ron Paul's reasons. But to me, there's a little brainwashing there. I view my kids as separate entities from me. They have their own views, their own needs. It wasn't about me. It was about giving them what they needed, standing back, and watching the magic happen.
I cherish those years my boys were home. I witnessed what most parents never get to see. I witnessed first hand how my children learned and processed the world around them. You miss that when they're at school. So believe me when I say, I am the luckiest mom ever.
In addition, the school had a policy of bathroom hall passes if a student needed to use the bathroom during class. You could get a pass ten times a year. The school was huge and if the kids had to go back to lockers to get more books or anything and had a class at the other end of the building, there wasn't enough time to do all of that and not be late to class. So, my son was told to use up a bathroom pass if late or pay a quarter to the teacher, or pay a fine or push a broom at lunch when his ten passes were gone.
Now, I found all this irritating. Mostly I found it irritating because my son didn't tell me about any of this until he needed money to pay the teacher for being late to class. This was at the end of the school year. And then that funny E word kept coming out of my mouth. You know the one. Extortion. And yes, I used that word when speaking to the vice principal. So imagine my surprise when he retaliated by bringing my son into his office and reading him the riot act about reporting this to me. Then he demanded to know what teachers were doing this. So, my son told him exactly who took money from him and who didn't. This resulted in his Science teacher accosting him in the hallway, yelling at him for telling that she did that when she didn't. So, once again, my son had to be the adult in the room and carefully explained to her that he specifically said she did NOT do this.
Now, over at the grade school where my younger son attended, he was in the TAG program. That's the Talented and Gifted program. My older son was apparently one point off on the testing, probably due to the cold he had that day, and was being watched for future inclusion in the program. (I didn't know that until I spoke with the program director, because no one tells parents anything) So, he's in the fourth grade, being taught by a kindergarten teacher. Yes, that mattered. She was opposed to TAG, even though the entire class was taught the same lessons. The TAG kids were just given separate assignments. So it had stopped being a pull out program. But she felt it was intrusive and preferred to treat the fourth graders as 5 year olds. Note to anyone who hasn't spent time around gifted children: you don't do that.
So when I asked the boys if they'd like to homeschool, they jumped at the idea. My oldest was relieved. My youngest was thrilled because he didn't apparently like his chair at school. We didn't do this because we were mad at the government. We didn't do it because we wanted to have some fundamentalist religious curriculum. We just did it because I didn't think they received the education they COULD receive, or be treated with the respect they deserved. Because my boys were always the students teachers wanted to have. They were nice kids. So no one was happy at the school district when we did this. It was a statement on their worth in their view. I guess in some ways that's true. But I don't think as Ron Paul does that parents are failures for sending their kids to public school. Not everyone can do what we did. Or should. The boys had good teachers for the most part when they attended public school. We live in a small town though, so I'm sure that had something to do with that. Parents were involved in their kids' education. We just decided to try something different.
And it worked! The boys discovered interests and I was more of a facilitator than a teacher. We adopted mostly an unschooling approach, with some directed subjects that they would need to learn skills for college. Math was Saxon math. History was Zinn's, A People's History of the US along with Lies My Teacher Told Me. Okay, I'm a liberal hippie, and yes I disagree with Mitch Daniel's attempt to eradicate the world of the works of Howard Zinn. I re-took Writing 121 and the boys used that as their writing curriculum. We read Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. They both became interested in computers and the oldest ended up graduating from college with a dual math/computer science degree and the youngest graduated with a degree in computer engineering and a full minor in computer science. They both work in their chosen fields.
The best thing about homeschooling is that your children will have the chance to explore their interests and develop their natural love of learning. They will understand that learning is not something that is done TO them, but BY them. It's their responsibility to embrace education. And if nothing else, as long as they learn that, then it's a complete success. My oldest started taking classes at the community college when he was fifteen. The youngest began attending classes at sixteen. They could do that under high school concurrent enrollment. My oldest was the only one to do that, however. They both took their GED tests at sixteen and either worked in the case of my oldest, or began attending college full time. By the time both were seventeen, they were in college full time.
One last thing. My boys are martial artists. We ran a kenpo school and they trained with us. I had no qualms about their ability to defend themselves should it become necessary while at school. One problem. The school district didn't share my viewpoint. If either of them had been involved in any altercations, they would have been expelled and arrested. The martial arts part has nothing to do with that. It was just a policy of expel, arrest, and sort it out later. I didn't like that. Here we were, training kids to defend themselves and at the one place they would likely experience an attack, they couldn't use what they had learned. And I'm not just talking about my kids. I'm talking about all the kids we taught over the years. So you know, when I hear this ridiculous second amendment argument about needing to have assault weapons so that we preserve our freedom, I have to laugh. Or scream. How do you tell a child he or she cannot defend themselves? How can school policy not preserve the rights of the victim? What message to they really want to send here?
People homeschool for lots of reasons. Sometimes they do it for Ron Paul's reasons. But to me, there's a little brainwashing there. I view my kids as separate entities from me. They have their own views, their own needs. It wasn't about me. It was about giving them what they needed, standing back, and watching the magic happen.
I cherish those years my boys were home. I witnessed what most parents never get to see. I witnessed first hand how my children learned and processed the world around them. You miss that when they're at school. So believe me when I say, I am the luckiest mom ever.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Stop taking children away from legal cannabis users
Evidently CPS workers don't understand the idea of legal cannabis users. So let me explain this to you.
States pass laws. Sometimes they involve cannabis. Get used to it. We've been lied to all this time about the safety and efficacy of this plant. Parents who use cannabis are not criminals, especially if they've been granted a legal way to use it such as for medicinal purposes. There's nothing here to protect a child from.
In the case of Washington state, they legalized cannabis for recreational purposes in addition to their existing medicinal cannabis law. The law protects parents from this type of harassment. Why would CPS in Washington state tell Billy Fisher that he shouldn't have custody of his daughter because he's a cannabis patient? Have they lost their minds? He wants custody to save her from an unsafe situation she's been in. Here's a guy who actually wants to take care of his child! He wants to protect her and give her the best life possible. He loves his little girl. And CPS wants to prevent him from doing so based on a lie.
Billy Fisher uses medicinal cannabis because of a degenerative disc condition. The state wants him to go into treatment and have two years of UA's during his follow up care for his so-called cannabis dependency.
Thanks for waiting..I had to scream for a bit.
Cannabis is NOT addictive. Those of us who use it medicinally or otherwise are not addicts. We're not drug traffickers. We're not criminals. We don't deserve to have our kids taken from us for using a safe plant to deal with our medical conditions. Because if we get to lose our kids for this, then so should anyone who drinks alcohol or uses prescription drugs. Especially in a state where it's legal recreationally.
There will be a rally hosted by Serra Frank from Moms for Marijuana International on the steps of the Spokane County Courthouse on October 3rd. It starts at 11am with a press conference beginning at 11:30. The link below gives details for anyone who can attend in support of Billy and his daughter.
We need to stop this travesty before it goes any further. #Peace4Patients
The Fight for Lilly Fisher
States pass laws. Sometimes they involve cannabis. Get used to it. We've been lied to all this time about the safety and efficacy of this plant. Parents who use cannabis are not criminals, especially if they've been granted a legal way to use it such as for medicinal purposes. There's nothing here to protect a child from.
In the case of Washington state, they legalized cannabis for recreational purposes in addition to their existing medicinal cannabis law. The law protects parents from this type of harassment. Why would CPS in Washington state tell Billy Fisher that he shouldn't have custody of his daughter because he's a cannabis patient? Have they lost their minds? He wants custody to save her from an unsafe situation she's been in. Here's a guy who actually wants to take care of his child! He wants to protect her and give her the best life possible. He loves his little girl. And CPS wants to prevent him from doing so based on a lie.
Billy Fisher uses medicinal cannabis because of a degenerative disc condition. The state wants him to go into treatment and have two years of UA's during his follow up care for his so-called cannabis dependency.
Thanks for waiting..I had to scream for a bit.
Cannabis is NOT addictive. Those of us who use it medicinally or otherwise are not addicts. We're not drug traffickers. We're not criminals. We don't deserve to have our kids taken from us for using a safe plant to deal with our medical conditions. Because if we get to lose our kids for this, then so should anyone who drinks alcohol or uses prescription drugs. Especially in a state where it's legal recreationally.
There will be a rally hosted by Serra Frank from Moms for Marijuana International on the steps of the Spokane County Courthouse on October 3rd. It starts at 11am with a press conference beginning at 11:30. The link below gives details for anyone who can attend in support of Billy and his daughter.
We need to stop this travesty before it goes any further. #Peace4Patients
The Fight for Lilly Fisher
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Life goes on..
It's interesting. Every time I either stand up for myself, or do what someone in authority tells me to do, I'm viewed as a bad person. It's as if as long as I'm doing everything that everyone else wants, then I'm a good person. If I say no to something, I'm not. How is that even possible? Or fair?
And the retaliation is awful. Because they always retaliate. My father (abuser) dies and as one of the beneficiaries, I'm given account numbers that my brother and I are beneficiaries on so that I can arrange for their disbursement. I did that. Then, wouldn't you know it, I received more account numbers from another bank. It's funny because I don't remember being told about them by my abuser's wife's family member who called me to give me the initial account numbers. I seem to remember getting the additional account numbers from my brother who found out when the bank sent him some paperwork on those accounts. Until then, he had no idea that they even existed. And according to my brother, my abuser's wife didn't appear happy that he knew about them. But I wasn't there, so I don't know if that was true or not. After all, he had a different relationship with him and was pretty upset about losing his father. But then he didn't do the things to my brother that he did to me. So I contacted that bank, did what they asked and the funds were disbursed to me and my brother. Now I'm the bad guy for doing so. And now my abuser's wife is sending me his medical bills to pay.
What I'd like to know is where is his will? I'm fairly certain that he had one. Who gets his personal possessions? I don't want any of them, but I know my brother would like to have something. Why do women get involved with men later in life, believing only what they tell them about themselves? Did she ever wonder why I had no contact with him? She's a mother. Didn't she suspect? I would have.
Well, I'm not going to pay anything and she has no right to ask for this. I had no contact with him for good reason. I wasn't safe around him. He had an arsenal that he used to intimidate and threaten me and my mother with. And where is that arsenal now? It was worth a fortune. I asked my brother and he doesn't know. Again, I don't want the arsenal. I want nothing other than what I've already received. I had no idea I was receiving anything and I had no idea my name was on any accounts. I had no contact with him. I had no choice there. He terrified me. And on July 2, when he died, I was finally safe. Survivors understand this. I'm sorry my abuser's wife can't. Instead, she's angry at, and punishes, his victim. I don't get this. He should have gone to prison for what he did. And she wants to punish ME?
I don't wish ill on my abuser's wife. I don't know her. I've never met her. And although I know my abuser could talk his way into and out of anything including a marriage (he's been married a bunch of times), I want nothing to do with anyone who has made a conscious decision to have something to do with him. I can't trust people who do this. I don't know if his past wives were unaware of who and what he was, but I can't take that chance that they were. He destroyed my chance at a healthy life.
And on July 2, 2013, after 55 terrifying years, I took that chance back. So there you have it.
And the retaliation is awful. Because they always retaliate. My father (abuser) dies and as one of the beneficiaries, I'm given account numbers that my brother and I are beneficiaries on so that I can arrange for their disbursement. I did that. Then, wouldn't you know it, I received more account numbers from another bank. It's funny because I don't remember being told about them by my abuser's wife's family member who called me to give me the initial account numbers. I seem to remember getting the additional account numbers from my brother who found out when the bank sent him some paperwork on those accounts. Until then, he had no idea that they even existed. And according to my brother, my abuser's wife didn't appear happy that he knew about them. But I wasn't there, so I don't know if that was true or not. After all, he had a different relationship with him and was pretty upset about losing his father. But then he didn't do the things to my brother that he did to me. So I contacted that bank, did what they asked and the funds were disbursed to me and my brother. Now I'm the bad guy for doing so. And now my abuser's wife is sending me his medical bills to pay.
What I'd like to know is where is his will? I'm fairly certain that he had one. Who gets his personal possessions? I don't want any of them, but I know my brother would like to have something. Why do women get involved with men later in life, believing only what they tell them about themselves? Did she ever wonder why I had no contact with him? She's a mother. Didn't she suspect? I would have.
Well, I'm not going to pay anything and she has no right to ask for this. I had no contact with him for good reason. I wasn't safe around him. He had an arsenal that he used to intimidate and threaten me and my mother with. And where is that arsenal now? It was worth a fortune. I asked my brother and he doesn't know. Again, I don't want the arsenal. I want nothing other than what I've already received. I had no idea I was receiving anything and I had no idea my name was on any accounts. I had no contact with him. I had no choice there. He terrified me. And on July 2, when he died, I was finally safe. Survivors understand this. I'm sorry my abuser's wife can't. Instead, she's angry at, and punishes, his victim. I don't get this. He should have gone to prison for what he did. And she wants to punish ME?
I don't wish ill on my abuser's wife. I don't know her. I've never met her. And although I know my abuser could talk his way into and out of anything including a marriage (he's been married a bunch of times), I want nothing to do with anyone who has made a conscious decision to have something to do with him. I can't trust people who do this. I don't know if his past wives were unaware of who and what he was, but I can't take that chance that they were. He destroyed my chance at a healthy life.
And on July 2, 2013, after 55 terrifying years, I took that chance back. So there you have it.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
I guess I got my wish..
Well, cool. We're not going to bomb Syria. At least not yet. So that's something. Syria has apparently agreed to hand over their chemical weapons (we'll see). Russia is on board. And everyone on MSNBC seems reluctant to be happy. And what's with the yellow coffee cups on the table? They clash. Pick another color. It's interesting that a bunch of people (me included) seem to have become pundits about MSNBC hosts. Everyone's mad at Chris Matthews and Chris Hayes. I get why they're mad at Matthews. He's not making any sense. Chris Hayes tends to have people on that I don't care for. Rachel talks way too fast and crams too many words into a tiny space in time. I love her stories that tie past events into the present, but I wish she'd not repeat herself so much. And for heaven's sake, take a breath. Because I tend to hold mine while listening and I get lightheaded. Help a girl out here..
I like all of the hosts at MSNBC. And I won't stop watching their news shows in favor of any else. But sometimes it's just noise, and my feedly suffices.
Back to the Syria mess. The President is in a continual catch-22 with Congress. They want him to come to Congress for a resolution, then say they won't vote for it. Could they stop making all of us look foolish? Because the world is wondering why we continually elect these people who can't seem to put one foot in front of the other without checking to see if the President is doing the same. And oh my God, if he is, then they come to a full stop. Cue the outrage. Suddenly they're no longer interested in moving forward. Now that he's let you all off the hook for a bit on this Syria mess, how about voting on something other than repealing Obamacare. Because the country is beginning to see just how great it's going to be, and already is for that matter. I would have preferred single payer. I believe that will come. But this is fine for now. So stop it. Get to work doing something positive for the American people.
And if Michelle Bachmann, Louie Gohmert and Steve King leave the country again, please don't let them back in. Golden opportunity..just sayin'.
I like all of the hosts at MSNBC. And I won't stop watching their news shows in favor of any else. But sometimes it's just noise, and my feedly suffices.
Back to the Syria mess. The President is in a continual catch-22 with Congress. They want him to come to Congress for a resolution, then say they won't vote for it. Could they stop making all of us look foolish? Because the world is wondering why we continually elect these people who can't seem to put one foot in front of the other without checking to see if the President is doing the same. And oh my God, if he is, then they come to a full stop. Cue the outrage. Suddenly they're no longer interested in moving forward. Now that he's let you all off the hook for a bit on this Syria mess, how about voting on something other than repealing Obamacare. Because the country is beginning to see just how great it's going to be, and already is for that matter. I would have preferred single payer. I believe that will come. But this is fine for now. So stop it. Get to work doing something positive for the American people.
And if Michelle Bachmann, Louie Gohmert and Steve King leave the country again, please don't let them back in. Golden opportunity..just sayin'.
Friday, September 6, 2013
How About a Solution that Preserves Humanity This Time..
Evidently someone somewhere decided that there were some things that we as a people just wouldn't tolerate. Using chemical weapons on people is one of those things - that it's a bridge too far. But here's my problem with designating one weapon as intolerable and another not so much. They all kill. They all destroy. As a mother, if my child dies due to violence of some kind, I really don't want to debate whether or not we're going to get outraged over it because of what weapon was used. The only thing that matters at that point is that my child is dead.
I mean, I get why some folks in this country make that distinction. After all, in this country the average person can own an assault weapon normally reserved for the military or law enforcement thanks to our insane Congress and the Bush Administration. When the Assault Weapons Ban was ended, the free for all began and now the notion of gun control is anathema to many. I guess it's just way too cool to own really big guns. Just do a search on You Tube and you'll see all kinds of videos of folks enjoying their machine guns. And before everyone gets all crazy, I learned to shoot when I was a child, and I own guns. But although I've either owned guns or been around them all of my life, I just don't see the need to own anything automatic or semi-automatic. And I have no problem with the existence of our 2nd amendment. I think some people are confused about its interpretation, but that's okay. It's part of what makes living in this country interesting. We don't always agree. And we used to have spirited debate. Now we have name calling.
This civil war in Syria has been going on for a while now. I've heard that 100,000 people have died as a result. And now approximately 1400 people have died because of chemical weapons, over 400 of which were children. And everyone became outraged. As they should. But where was the outrage as 100,000 were killed? Why didn't the world stand up and intervene during all this time? Apparently two million Syrians are now refugees in neighboring countries. The humanitarian crisis this creates is devastating. I read that over half of the refugees are children. Where is our outrage for that?
I'm also tired of the whole "we can't be the world's policeman" meme. Sometimes we have to be the adult in the room. And sometimes that adult is a policeman. Deal with it. Having this so-called democracy has taught us a thing or two. And even though we probably shouldn't force democracy down other countries' throats, they really would do well to become one. It's not perfect, as we see on a daily basis, but it's better than what's happening in Syria.
And then there's the whole "we're guilty of the same thing" meme. Yes. We've been idiots too. That shouldn't stop us from trying to help people. Maybe we atone by doing the right thing.
But here's the thing. Surely there's something else to do here besides bombing the crap out of them. We already know too well how that tends to work out. You know...that whole human shield thing and all. Plus, doesn't that count as an act of war? We can call it a surgical strike, or a limited engagement, and get all freaked out at the thought of boots on the ground, but we all know what's going to happen here. Of course there will be boots on the ground. And it's not about regime change. Really? Of course we want regime change. You can't leave the idiot in power to do the same thing again. Because we all know that he will.
And how will we pay for it? The sequester is already making life difficult for the most vulnerable and the not so vulnerable. But we can go to war again? How? How can the government say to the American people that they have to wait a while longer for things to get better here? We all agree that chemical weapons are a bad thing that deserves a response. But so did everything else this idiot has done. And that's the point. We either value life or we don't. We can't decide that as long as mass deaths are caused by certain weapons, then we don't need to do anything. Not if we value life. Ideally, we should all rise up when injustice happens. But we don't. We look the other way all the time. It's not, as Congressman Grayson says, our problem.
Well, I disagree with the good Congressman. This is humanity's problem. And last time I looked, we're part of said humanity. However, it would be nice if, for once, we could come up with a response that doesn't involve killing more people. Because I think its preservation is far better than its destruction.
I mean, I get why some folks in this country make that distinction. After all, in this country the average person can own an assault weapon normally reserved for the military or law enforcement thanks to our insane Congress and the Bush Administration. When the Assault Weapons Ban was ended, the free for all began and now the notion of gun control is anathema to many. I guess it's just way too cool to own really big guns. Just do a search on You Tube and you'll see all kinds of videos of folks enjoying their machine guns. And before everyone gets all crazy, I learned to shoot when I was a child, and I own guns. But although I've either owned guns or been around them all of my life, I just don't see the need to own anything automatic or semi-automatic. And I have no problem with the existence of our 2nd amendment. I think some people are confused about its interpretation, but that's okay. It's part of what makes living in this country interesting. We don't always agree. And we used to have spirited debate. Now we have name calling.
This civil war in Syria has been going on for a while now. I've heard that 100,000 people have died as a result. And now approximately 1400 people have died because of chemical weapons, over 400 of which were children. And everyone became outraged. As they should. But where was the outrage as 100,000 were killed? Why didn't the world stand up and intervene during all this time? Apparently two million Syrians are now refugees in neighboring countries. The humanitarian crisis this creates is devastating. I read that over half of the refugees are children. Where is our outrage for that?
I'm also tired of the whole "we can't be the world's policeman" meme. Sometimes we have to be the adult in the room. And sometimes that adult is a policeman. Deal with it. Having this so-called democracy has taught us a thing or two. And even though we probably shouldn't force democracy down other countries' throats, they really would do well to become one. It's not perfect, as we see on a daily basis, but it's better than what's happening in Syria.
And then there's the whole "we're guilty of the same thing" meme. Yes. We've been idiots too. That shouldn't stop us from trying to help people. Maybe we atone by doing the right thing.
But here's the thing. Surely there's something else to do here besides bombing the crap out of them. We already know too well how that tends to work out. You know...that whole human shield thing and all. Plus, doesn't that count as an act of war? We can call it a surgical strike, or a limited engagement, and get all freaked out at the thought of boots on the ground, but we all know what's going to happen here. Of course there will be boots on the ground. And it's not about regime change. Really? Of course we want regime change. You can't leave the idiot in power to do the same thing again. Because we all know that he will.
And how will we pay for it? The sequester is already making life difficult for the most vulnerable and the not so vulnerable. But we can go to war again? How? How can the government say to the American people that they have to wait a while longer for things to get better here? We all agree that chemical weapons are a bad thing that deserves a response. But so did everything else this idiot has done. And that's the point. We either value life or we don't. We can't decide that as long as mass deaths are caused by certain weapons, then we don't need to do anything. Not if we value life. Ideally, we should all rise up when injustice happens. But we don't. We look the other way all the time. It's not, as Congressman Grayson says, our problem.
Well, I disagree with the good Congressman. This is humanity's problem. And last time I looked, we're part of said humanity. However, it would be nice if, for once, we could come up with a response that doesn't involve killing more people. Because I think its preservation is far better than its destruction.
Sunday, September 1, 2013
About that WaPo opinion piece...
An interesting opinion piece appeared in the Washington Post on August 30 by Betsy Karasik, a former lawyer. She was writing about her views on the Montana case where a teacher and student engaged in a supposedly consensual sexual relationship. The teenaged victim committed suicide in 2010, and the teacher was recently sentenced to 30 days in jail for what he did. My last blog post was my own response to the judge's ruling. I believe he should resign. He refuses to do so. So there you have it.
And now my attempt at highlighting and responding to what she wrote. Apologies if I screw up. I'm really trying to get this right. And I'll try not to let my own agenda make me snarky. Because I do have an agenda and I can get really snarky when I'm upset.
Ms. Karasik believes that not every sexual encounter between students and teachers should be called rape. She does believe that they should lose their jobs and not get them back until they can prove they are not going to engage in that type of behavior anymore. She believes that teenage girls think about sex as much or more as do boys at that age. She recounts how she knew people in high school and college who had sexual relationships with teachers and no one, as she put it, "died". She stated further that sexual contact between students and teachers is not so cut and dried as we'd like to believe and that viewing all of it the same way only creates further problems such as students being reluctant to report problems if all this drama results when they do. Although she does state that something has to happen to teachers who offend this way, the criminal justice system is not the place because it results in too much shame for the victim. She calls what happened, "underage sex" and draws a distinction between that and statutory rape.
Okay.
I was also a teenage girl. And yes, I was sexually active during high school. I was also attracted to various teachers in high school and college. And here's the thing about college. I was 16 when I began and 20 when I graduated. I did not act on my attraction to older guys in high school, but I did in college and one was a teacher, and the other was the head of the department. I agree with her assessment about those experiences not ruining my life, but did I do all that because I was ready, or because I was a survivor of sexual abuse? Do we know if the girl was a survivor before this happened? If she was, would this fact influence Ms. Karasik's view? If every child targeted by teachers were also survivors would it be okay to charge the teacher with rape then?
Okay, deep breath..
I didn't report what happened to me because I feared for my life. How does Ms. Karasik know that high school girls aren't facing the same thing with these so-called "consensual" relationships? And as far as calling this "underage sex", that was always reserved for kids..not kids and teachers. If it's an adult, it's not underage sex. It's an adult having sex with a child. I don't really care if we call it something else as long as the teacher does jail time for it. Rehab doesn't work for these people.
Ms. Karasik admonishes against painting situations like these with a broad brush, that not every encounter should be viewed the same way. I agree with her to a point. The problem I have with that view is she doesn't take into account the background of the girls who this happens to. What if these girls have already been abused and are only approaching these teachers because of their own boundary issues created from that abuse? I agree that high school girls are far more aware than even I was in the 70's, but still, they deserve protection from teachers who target and abuse them. Consent flies right out the window when it's someone not in your peer group. And if teachers can't figure this out, then they need to go away. Permanently. They should never be allowed to teach again.
Oh, and about that shame thing.. I know something about shame. I agree that the system makes things difficult if not impossible for victims. So change that. But to not incarcerate these idiots makes a mockery of what victims go through. And here's another thing about those of us who this happens to. Our views can change about the experience as we mature. We may be fine about it when it happens, but then later, as we become adults and mothers, we see just how risky it all was. And then we wish that teacher would have had cared enough to stop us instead of viewing it as playtime.
As far as something other than incarceration so that the victim isn't traumatized, I don't understand that at all. And the reference to religious leaders and politicians not keeping their pants on as justification for expecting the same from teachers is odd. Why appeal to the lowest common denominator? Why not use this as a teachable moment? If the teenage girl is upset that her "boyfriend" is being put in jail, then maybe it's time to explain what actually happened to her. That he's not her "boyfriend", but her teacher. That he used his position of authority and her youthful inexperience to fulfill his own needs. We shouldn't accept boundary violations from anyone. And we should never point the finger at all the problem children out there posing as adults to justify the rest of this nonsense. Just because someone else behaves badly, it now excuses everyone else's bad behavior? Really? We shouldn't have standards?
Maybe there should be a different set of laws when high school aged kids are involved. Maybe it should be, as Ms. Karasik suggests, more "nuanced". But we have to draw the line somewhere. Predators groom their victims. Teachers have the perfect opportunity to do this. I watched my father, my abuser, be inappropriate with my friends. He was a teacher. He had to leave his teaching position when dozens of letters from parents and students poured into the school district, complaining about his inappropriate comments and behavior. I have no idea if he put his hands on anyone because he never was arrested. He's dead now. So there's that. We're all safe now.
This is, in some ways, a complicated issue. But then, it's not. The saying is, between two consenting adults. It's not, between a consenting adult and a consenting child. A child cannot give consent. Ever. There are problems with the system, to be sure. But a child giving consent isn't one of them. We must protect our children. Incarcerating these predators is necessary. They won't stop, so we must stop them. There should be no exceptions to this. To feel sorry for the teacher in question is misplaced. He should have known better. He's an adult. She was 14. And now she's dead.
UPDATE: Jessica Valenti wrote an article in The Nation about this issue..well worth a read: http://www.thenation.com/blog/175991/acting-older-isnt-being-older-how-we-fail-young-rape-victims#
And now my attempt at highlighting and responding to what she wrote. Apologies if I screw up. I'm really trying to get this right. And I'll try not to let my own agenda make me snarky. Because I do have an agenda and I can get really snarky when I'm upset.
Ms. Karasik believes that not every sexual encounter between students and teachers should be called rape. She does believe that they should lose their jobs and not get them back until they can prove they are not going to engage in that type of behavior anymore. She believes that teenage girls think about sex as much or more as do boys at that age. She recounts how she knew people in high school and college who had sexual relationships with teachers and no one, as she put it, "died". She stated further that sexual contact between students and teachers is not so cut and dried as we'd like to believe and that viewing all of it the same way only creates further problems such as students being reluctant to report problems if all this drama results when they do. Although she does state that something has to happen to teachers who offend this way, the criminal justice system is not the place because it results in too much shame for the victim. She calls what happened, "underage sex" and draws a distinction between that and statutory rape.
Okay.
I was also a teenage girl. And yes, I was sexually active during high school. I was also attracted to various teachers in high school and college. And here's the thing about college. I was 16 when I began and 20 when I graduated. I did not act on my attraction to older guys in high school, but I did in college and one was a teacher, and the other was the head of the department. I agree with her assessment about those experiences not ruining my life, but did I do all that because I was ready, or because I was a survivor of sexual abuse? Do we know if the girl was a survivor before this happened? If she was, would this fact influence Ms. Karasik's view? If every child targeted by teachers were also survivors would it be okay to charge the teacher with rape then?
Okay, deep breath..
I didn't report what happened to me because I feared for my life. How does Ms. Karasik know that high school girls aren't facing the same thing with these so-called "consensual" relationships? And as far as calling this "underage sex", that was always reserved for kids..not kids and teachers. If it's an adult, it's not underage sex. It's an adult having sex with a child. I don't really care if we call it something else as long as the teacher does jail time for it. Rehab doesn't work for these people.
Ms. Karasik admonishes against painting situations like these with a broad brush, that not every encounter should be viewed the same way. I agree with her to a point. The problem I have with that view is she doesn't take into account the background of the girls who this happens to. What if these girls have already been abused and are only approaching these teachers because of their own boundary issues created from that abuse? I agree that high school girls are far more aware than even I was in the 70's, but still, they deserve protection from teachers who target and abuse them. Consent flies right out the window when it's someone not in your peer group. And if teachers can't figure this out, then they need to go away. Permanently. They should never be allowed to teach again.
Oh, and about that shame thing.. I know something about shame. I agree that the system makes things difficult if not impossible for victims. So change that. But to not incarcerate these idiots makes a mockery of what victims go through. And here's another thing about those of us who this happens to. Our views can change about the experience as we mature. We may be fine about it when it happens, but then later, as we become adults and mothers, we see just how risky it all was. And then we wish that teacher would have had cared enough to stop us instead of viewing it as playtime.
As far as something other than incarceration so that the victim isn't traumatized, I don't understand that at all. And the reference to religious leaders and politicians not keeping their pants on as justification for expecting the same from teachers is odd. Why appeal to the lowest common denominator? Why not use this as a teachable moment? If the teenage girl is upset that her "boyfriend" is being put in jail, then maybe it's time to explain what actually happened to her. That he's not her "boyfriend", but her teacher. That he used his position of authority and her youthful inexperience to fulfill his own needs. We shouldn't accept boundary violations from anyone. And we should never point the finger at all the problem children out there posing as adults to justify the rest of this nonsense. Just because someone else behaves badly, it now excuses everyone else's bad behavior? Really? We shouldn't have standards?
Maybe there should be a different set of laws when high school aged kids are involved. Maybe it should be, as Ms. Karasik suggests, more "nuanced". But we have to draw the line somewhere. Predators groom their victims. Teachers have the perfect opportunity to do this. I watched my father, my abuser, be inappropriate with my friends. He was a teacher. He had to leave his teaching position when dozens of letters from parents and students poured into the school district, complaining about his inappropriate comments and behavior. I have no idea if he put his hands on anyone because he never was arrested. He's dead now. So there's that. We're all safe now.
This is, in some ways, a complicated issue. But then, it's not. The saying is, between two consenting adults. It's not, between a consenting adult and a consenting child. A child cannot give consent. Ever. There are problems with the system, to be sure. But a child giving consent isn't one of them. We must protect our children. Incarcerating these predators is necessary. They won't stop, so we must stop them. There should be no exceptions to this. To feel sorry for the teacher in question is misplaced. He should have known better. He's an adult. She was 14. And now she's dead.
UPDATE: Jessica Valenti wrote an article in The Nation about this issue..well worth a read: http://www.thenation.com/blog/175991/acting-older-isnt-being-older-how-we-fail-young-rape-victims#
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)