Pride of the Bullied

Pride of the Bullied

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

If you have not been bullied, you will never truly know what the bottom of a foot looks like. If you have not been bullied, you will never know what it feels to be completely alone in agony and torment. If you have not been bullied consider yourself lucky to not have the learning opportunities that those of us who have been bullied. If you have not been bullied, consider yourself lucky to not need the armor to protect against what life will throw. If you have been bullied, consider how far you have traveled under so much duress and how much you have moved above the ugly of life. Consider that you survived and learned from those experiences.

We are the non-athletic, spectacle-faced, different-looking, 4-eyes, retarded, non-cliched, non-Christian, not-rich, fat, geeky, fag and queer. We, the bullied, were The Scarlet Letter every day at recess, in the locker room, on the way home, and even at home in many cases. There would be no reason given. Even more ironic, when we could excel, we were still being ridiculed and persecuted. We wanted to just be. Yet, our achievements and dreams were fodder for the taunts just the same.

More than anything, we challenge the teachings of Jesus to love our enemies or to turn the other cheek one more time. We know in our hearts that we would like to at least have done to them what they have done to us. We may find ourselves shaking fists at God for the apparent disparity of experiences. Further, the people that were supposed to be there for us were no-where to console or to support. They offered to us jerky idioms about sticks and stones, but we know, for certain, that words can cut painfully deep. We have been forced to sit on the sidelines of what it feels like to be a person because of irrational hatred.

Those bullies grow up and are surprised at how we feel about them. Unfortunately, they may go on bullying people as well as their own children while we find more ways to build more courage to work another day without much fanfare. We may applaud for the underdogs, comeback kids and may even consider that we finally escaped if we are able to leave the torment of schoolyards, churches, or even our families.

When you grow older, you find there are different sorts of bullies in the world. They call you names behind their hypocritical religious views. They taunt you for living outside their 1950s TV sitcom of normal. They defile your picture, your ideas, and very being. They beat you into submission and force you to fall in line. We cannot be frightened of Hell when Earth has been the definition of horror.

These bullies, they will never know what sensations will overcome you when people rip your child away because of some test of religion or supposed lifestyle. They will not know the betrayal felt when family members are willing to hurt your spouse and kids because they are not what they envisioned. They will never know the defeat you have when you are kicked out of the house for simply being who you are. They will not know the awful torment of knowing that your family will be the focus of the many attacks from around the community because your family does not conform.

Fortunately for us, we, the bullied, have learned to not live in the pretense of the past or stale sitcoms. We realize there is such a thing as real respect and real compassion. Some of us, instead, become empowered by bitterness; some by pride of finally feeling untouchable by the bullies. We can question why we could not enjoy days without harassment, torment or physical torture. We do not want to watch sinister fingers scheme to hurt us again.

Still, bitterness is an attachment that should be released otherwise it may evolve into more senseless hatred and violence. Maybe, this is why many want to drown out those memories and experiences through alcohol and drugs to escape that haunting history. Yet, we “made it” this far.

We have outlasted the taunts and teasing. We learn to laugh at the ridiculousness of those taunts. We learned the price of intolerance and the grace of loving fully. We found refuge in places that they cannot touch like music, writing, religion, sports and even our own families.

That is why we like personalities that push beyond those taunts and hateful remarks. This is why people seek refuge in religion because that realm is supposed to be exempt from perpetual torture on Earth. Yet, there are those that want to turn that idea into an exclusive arena that is more indicative of the gladiator trials we faced at recess instead of the place of solace mentioned in the scriptures.

The bullied are not alone and will see better days. We, the bullied, have learned and will continue to learn. We, the bullied, will march with other souls because we, too, have a place and we, too, are part of loving families. We, the bullied, will show how compassion works because we know what real compassion is rather than simply looks like. We will build better families despite the ridicule. We will embody that which Jesus taught because we have already suffered Hell. Maybe, the bullies will never learn, and maybe, they will always find reasons to scorn people. We, the bullied, will come to the aid of our brothers and sisters like soldiers because like soldiers, they should never be forgotten. We will be shining examples of good people, even if the bullies are blind to the facts. We, the bullied, have pride because we are better than bullies. 

No H8!

Spring Forward

Spring Forward

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

Spring is great time to do some house cleaning and yard work. Spring is the essence of renewal, growth; and a time of beginnings in a season that is defined by constant changes in weather patterns. Along with physical clutter, this is a time of opportunities to throw out bad habits and grudges. This idea kept coming to mind when I heard Rev. Miller-Coleman remark in sermon at Plymouth UCC in Des Moines that “We have so much treasure laid up in the coin of the old order and we live in a place where that old order appears to prevail.”  These words in her sermon resonate throughout our lives about how we should embrace change in our lives. 

Turning around and opening our eyes to the good possibilities of life is repentance; we can unchain the shackles of the “old order” whatever that may be in our lives. The rejection of those shackles (or repentance) is simply the beginning, and each new day is a reassertion of that positive repentance and change. With the season of spring, we have metaphors about what this theme means for removing clutter.

We also know that a moment of clarity (or the proverbial “ah-ha” moment) is something that addicts refer as a point where there is a realization to change destructive habits (both action and thought). The first rays of warm spring can feel like a moment of realization and blessed event. In these moments, there is a point when someone realizes the path taken needs to change. In those moments, the clarity can also be a realization that what one was thinking is not true. This can be a painful and frightful experience that overwhelms people.

Change may seem to be daunting, dangerous and frightening like springtime storms, but change is necessary no less. The time and energy we spend fearing and avoiding change could be used more positively in embracing what is inevitable and adapting to the change in our most opportune ways.

In hindsight then, change will be less fierce and less destructive to us because experience is a teacher to even the foolish. History is familiar and useful aid for the current as well as the future. Yet, if you are only focused upon the successes and failures of the past, there is little chance to understand and to improve upon what is happening now.

Like cats, we can shed our coats, but we can shed more than coats. We can examine our lives by vetting our thoughts and actions today with respect to positive change. In this time of year, we can become a “new” person by turning away from poor habits, addictions or bad attitudes and angers. We remove those bonds in order to transform our lives.

Remove the resistance to change that stems from holding onto the old order “treasure” regardless of having any sort of value. Hoarding angers, bitterness or hatreds do not get you closer to happiness nor does that help you become a better you. We can let go of this clutter in our lives, and open our minds along with our actions so that we can enjoy more of the beauty in the world that unfolds before us.

Whether we have been hurt, discriminated, or wronged, the duty then does not fall upon us to conduct more ugly behavior upon others or even ourselves. Proper amends should not include more poor, unhealthy, or ugly decisions.

Further, we should be less concerned about judging others, should not turn to exclusion via individually or creating exclusive clubs  (especially in the LGBT community whether marked by treasure or egos). Practicing exclusivity within an already discriminated community is like driving on the wrong way of a highway. It is inconsiderate and reckless. Chances are that people are going to be hurt. In reality, exclusivity is part of the “old order” which never had real value.

We can consider spring as a reminder that the path is not always the way we envision. Nature does not obey what we think or want.  We know this, especially in spring, because a day may look inviting and graceful when a powerful destructive storm arrives without notice. To envision a changed and more positive person within us, we must be able to weather those storms in our lives. Here, the difficult, along with the grace, are to be experienced one day at a time. This is because the journey and the quest are more important than the actual findings. As well, the opportunity to clean house or to adjust to a new environment is available to us always.  That is because our key is always within our reach, and that opportunity never closes. The longer we wait to use that, however, the longer we hold onto the shackles and the “coin of the old order.”

In spring, we can celebrate life renewed. We can take each new day as an expression of the possibilities that are waiting. We can find those parts of our lives that have real value (both to ourselves and to those around us.) Spring reminds us that the path is not always sunshine with the constant threat of storms. Yet, we do not need to run our lives in fear of storms.  They, too, offer an opportunity for positive change.

May you enjoy your spring and may the storms along your journey be light. Most of all may your spring cleaning help you renew exciting parts of life and discover those elements that have true wealth and value. Let us not cower behind fictitious visions of what we want or think things should be. Instead, let us embrace what change and opportunities are waiting.  With a clear mind, we do not have to carry heavy clutter forward.  With a clear mind and shackles removed, we can finally spring forward. 

Moving Forward

Moving Forward

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

17 Feb 2013

Diane Ravitch said about education reform that “The greatest obstacle to those who hope to reform… is complacency.” While she may have been speaking about education, her comment reflects upon any noble crusade for reform.

Listening to the news recently, one would think that we have achieved great milestones with respect to equality as pertaining to the LGBT community. While we may have finally crossed some dimensions of the struggle, there are still many throughout the United States that do not enjoy any semblance of equality whom those in specific states or cities enjoy (notwithstanding the federal DOMA restrictions). We may have had our moments including when a President (whether premeditated by political campaigning or not) recognized the civil rights strife in the current era as inclusive of the LGBT community. We, however, cannot rest on our laurels thinking the war is won. We cannot become complacent.

The work of many years and the milestones that we have achieved, thus far, can easily be vaporized if we do nothing to keep the pace moving forward. The Promised Land cannot be thought of as here and now, but instead, that moment will only be when equality is achieved for all of our brothers and sisters.

For all of the advances that we have gained, there are those that are actively working to stem or to reverse the tide because they have now had to endure major setbacks. We do not have to think too far back to remember how that feels on our side. In 2010 (just couple years ago), judges were voted out of office because of narrow-minded bigotry while more states voted to exclude marriage from loving couples. In Iowa, we are but a couple votes away from having a constitutional amendment proposal in Iowa to exclude marriage. To think we have somehow escaped the gravity of bigotry and right-wing mantras in American politics is erroneous and dangerous to the cause of continued freedom.

Further, complacency sanctions people to be lulled into inactivity and even arrogance. Even great athletes lose important matches and games if they think they have finally achieved the winning point without actually finishing the win. The time to rest is not now. The time now is to keep the presence in the face of, as well as to keep the pressure upon, lawmakers to help equality to remain alive. The time now is to help friends and family to remember what equality and freedom mean at the ballot box. For those that have yet to enjoy equality, we must help to further their cause because we are reminded of how breathtakingly close we are.

We know the people of the far-right are planning the next move, and again, they will be well-funded. They are digging through numbers and stories to find material that they can use to destroy equality. They are planning on less active voting in the next elections. They will use fear; they will use so-called traditions; and they will use fabrications and distortions of truth to further their agendas. They will paint pictures of burning Rome, will recall angry prophecies of the Bible and will ridicule ideas that promote diversity. They will cast terrorism and diversity as mutual enemies of the state. We know this because we have seen this. They are still using these tactics and we can expect them to continue this pathology of destructive lies, especially if they think we are complacent with our recent victories.

Conservative Barry Goldwater said, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice…moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Complacency cannot be our resolve, but instead we should be even more vigilant. No society can base its traditions upon lies and deceit unless they are all liars and deceivers. No society can continue to be great when the whole of its members are disallowed to expand in culture, knowledge and skills. As Martin Luther King Jr said, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” We must further the cause of equality without prejudice, respect of diversity, respect for all families, and adherence to the truth. We must do this not just in our community and state, but we must also help our LGBT friends and family elsewhere.

We should be extreme with defending our rights because they are granted to us by a higher power. Equal justice and love for neighbor is essential to what Jesus taught. No one should be allowed to distort that, and no one should place liberty (or equal justice) in the wavering hands of whatever the current tyrannical majority believes. Nor should we allow hateful lies to stand uncontested.

Freedom, justice and equality may be birthrights, but we know that some would ensure that we do not get to enjoy these God-given benefits. They purpose their negative lives so that we do not get our share of the pie. They may do this because of some false notion of a superiority complex or they may simply not want to share the fruits of society with all. If they will not allow us to celebrate and to enjoy our birthrights, we must be ready and willing to fight.

A Flat World 3.0?

A Flat World

9 January 2013

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

There are many people who like to describe the world as “flat”, notably New York Times columnist, Thomas Friedman. This is supposed to describe globalization as a measure of the growing competitiveness and interdependence between cultures and countries of the world that has been a feature of modern society. This supposedly indicates that cultures are working together more relegating national borders to mere dots on a map. In contrast, others suggest that these claims are quite exaggerated compared to actual data.  Their assertion is that there are relatively small interactions between cultures and countries.  This presents an interesting discussion about the nature of globalization and cultural interactions both globally and locally because we do not have to look far to see that true global interaction is far from realized. 

The points made by Mr. Friedman’s allies have been readily absorbed by many in academics, economics and politicians. With some empirical observation and interviews with a few entrepreneurs, we can see the world through the eyes of those who work on a global level. Through these, we see how some markets have changed from local to supra-national markets that span OECD countries as well as some non-OECD countries.  We can see vast supply chains that stretch across the globe whereas the previous generation tended to keep those supply chains within domestic borders. 

These long supply chains require a consideration of foreign disruptions, competitions, and government policies that differ from local markets.  American companies (doing business overseas) along with government had to change how they managed competition and economics due to the rapid expanse of foreign companies and governments. We should find this to be curious when capital markets have spread the chain (or web) across unfriendly and competitive regions of the globe when the ultimate sale is local. The supply chain may be spread across the globe, however, the places people go to buy the finished product is local, and conversations we have are with our selected communities.

Friedman, using his showcase stories, argues that the current globalization trend is driven by individuals creating and collaborating primarily using a “common” flat technology platform spanning vast networks.  With the explosion of social media, interactivity and connections span multiple continents between billions of people that previously were unable to connect. There is reason to believe that people are much more connected globally as well as locally. This is a bit of overstatement and generalization based upon perceptions.

The exaggerated perception shows in how Americans perceive larger budget portions dedicated to foreign aid versus actual figures or even in comparison to domestic aid and spending. We can see the changes in news reporting over the years that contain dwindling amounts of international news (unless you listen to NPR). 

As well, we can consider the quick action of making a connection via social media versus actually having a conversation with someone from across the ocean. Is that connection just based upon a profitable network opportunity or are we truly seeking to learns different ideas? We may be crossing the globalization threshold espoused by Mr. Friedman’s allies if we are willing to learn from others especially regardless if we agree or comprehend the premise of their ideas. Yet, the West is more likely to visit and to discuss news from the West, as opposed to say Central Africa, based upon distorted notions of technical and philosophical growth. This limits our own ingenuity, resourcefulness and expansion to ideas of supposedly superior cultural growth and assumptions. 

We can see the result of this in the rejection of the West by Arabic countries. There are divergent opinions and priorities between people in different parts of the country, the state, and even between churches that claim the same denomination within a few blocks of each other. The LGBT community cannot understand why some do not see the connection of marriage as love between people rather than an exclusive tradition. People who have never understood the feeling of being considered second-class do not understand the pride of wanting to be part of the promised-land that is equality. We may live in a world that enjoys accessibility to ideas, but we are comforted when contained within our own familiar realm of thinking, sometimes deliberately.  Whether it is called the “big sort” or “wisdom of the flock”, people tend to get their desired information and opinions from the selected sources and people.

Technology can help to overcome supposed localizations and physical limitations that people have built over time (e.g. nation-state, religion, high schools, neighborhoods, political parties). Yet, to claim that people are using technology to actively reach across various barriers is muted if less than 10% do the stretching. One only has to look at your own social media to see with whom you interact, the events and the places you go. Even more, consider how many conversations with people outside of your community (whether LGBT, local city, school or family) that you have participated. We self-select, intentionally or not, what places we go and with whom we interact. 

We have to question Mr. Friedman’s ideas because the idea of a flat world cannot be realized when most people do not go beyond their realms, regardless of a global web or the few entrepreneurs. There are issues with global impacts like climate change, oil supply, and expansion of technology. Still, we prefer to hear solutions from people like us.  Those global problems require global cooperation and discussions rather than simply giving orders and expecting everyone to fall in-line. Those issues require more drastic actions than a button click.

Globalization can teach us much about ourselves and our expectations, but how do we go beyond our own perceptions?  The technology and capacity is ready if we are willing to expand. Of this I agree with Mr. Friedman, we should do what we think is possible, however improbable, because someone somewhere will do it.

A Flat World (for AccessLine Iowa)

A Flat World (for AccessLine Iowa)

17 January 2013

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

There are many people who like to describe the world as “flat”, notably New York Times columnist, Thomas Friedman. This is supposed to describe globalization as a measure of the growing competitiveness and interdependence between cultures and countries of the world that has been a feature of modern society. This supposedly indicates that cultures are working together more while relegating national borders to mere dots on a map. In contrast, others suggest that these claims are quite exaggerated compared to actual data.  Their assertion is that there are relatively small interactions between cultures and countries.  We can see examples of this in our own community where we do not have to look far to see that true global interaction is far from realized due to the divided nature our society is embroiled. 

With some empirical observation, we can see how some markets and communities have changed from local to global in scope as espoused by Friedman’s allies.  Some aspects of capital markets may be spread across the globe, however, the places people go to buy the finished product is local. As well, the interactions that we have are with our selected communities.

Friedman further argues that the current globalization trend is primarily driven by individuals creating and collaborating through a common flat technology platform across the vast networks.  With social media that allows interactivity and connections to span multiple continents between billions of people that were previously unable to connect, there is reason to believe that people are much more connected as a global community through a simple button-click. While some networks, like Facebook, have expanded to over 500 million across several continents and supply chains have allowed for global connections, there is a bit of generalization based upon hopeful perceptions.

The overstatement is evident in how people interact within and outside of their respective communities. There may be a common technology (e.g. social media, currency, telecommunications and others), but people are self-selecting their conversations they wish to participate.  This inhibits the true realization of globalization.

As I have argued before, we can consider the quick action of making a connection via social media versus the action of having a conversation with someone from across the ocean and learning the culture. We know that people, in the same room, can have totally different conversations in complete opposition to each other without ever saying a word to each other. We can cross the globalization threshold only if we are willing to learn from others regardless whether we agree with the different ideas. 

We are more likely to agree, participate and rally around points that favor our own perceived interests based upon notions of philosophical openness and growth. Yes, we should affirm truths, and we should not be afraid to call out erroneous ideas. Listening only to what we want to hear and yelling above the opposition, however, limits our own ingenuity, resourcefulness and expansion.

We may live in a world that enjoys accessibility to ideas, but we find ourselves contained within our own realm of thinking, sometimes deliberately.  Whether called the “big sort” or “wisdom of the flock”, people tend to get their desired information and opinions from the people around them. We can see this in how people organize throughout different parts of the country, the state, and within cities. Even religious organizations that claim the same denomination, within a few blocks of each other, do not want to understand the other religious opinions and priorities (e.g. marriage or other traditions). 

People want to believe they have the correct ideas (regardless of logic) and will reject anything that conflicts with that.  When leaders promote conflicting ideas, they get rejected as not leading (e.g. Obama) because they do not align with those paradigms. Those who never found themselves considered lower class do not want to understand the pride of those wanting to be included in the Promised Land of equality and fairness, even when pride is all you have. Being beholden to biases and traditions can destroy the fortunes of merit. 

Technology can help to overcome supposed localizations, physical limitations, as well as outdated ideas that people have built over time. Yet, to claim that people are actively reaching across various barriers is muted if only 10% do the stretching when using the technology. Whether with the LGBT community, local city, school or family, one only has to look at your own connections to see with whom you and your friends interact and the events you participate. We self-select, intentionally or not, to be parts of those communities. 

Now, capable leaders may be able to transcend barriers.  Effective leaders not only transcend deterrents, but they are the workers that get people to think in terms of a community of action and cooperation. Moreover, they help to focus minds and discussions. They simply do.

There are more issues that have global impacts like equal rights, climate change, oil supply, and expansion of technology. Still, we cannot insist to hear solutions only from people like us. Any issue that impacts more than one community requires cooperation. Those issues require more drastic actions than a button click, and leaders to do the work.

Globalization can teach us much about ourselves and our expectations, but we have to go beyond our own perceptions. The technology and capacity is ready if we are willing to expand. Of this I agree with Mr. Friedman, we should do what we think is possible, however improbable, because someone somewhere will do it, and they will be the leaders.

Guns and Weed

Guns and Weed: Perspectives of Personal Liberty vs Public Health 

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

14 December 2012

The recent referendums in Colorado and Washington to legalize recreational use (in addition to medical use) of marijuana restarted a long-standing conversation about whether cannabis is 1) truly a destructive substance and 2) whether the government should be prohibiting the use, sale or possession of this substance. In addition, the country has witness multiple seemingly random mass killings of people in public venues within the past few months. These seemingly divergent issues are affecting aspects of personal liberty in contrast to whether government should regulate those aspects. 

In the debate over legalizing recreational marijuana use, we see claims of personal liberty being expanded by the recent votes in the two states. We see this apparent expansion of rights in stark contrast to long-standing government regulation against cannabis use. There is a claim that the individual intoxicating use of marijuana is, in effect, a public health menace that must be controlled. The intoxicating effects of cannabis are readily related to alcohol, but the use of that cannabis results in far less deaths than alcohol. Also, the substance supposedly is a “gateway drug” to more hardcore substances or even a “life of crime”. Of this, one argues that stems from the often shady environment where people have to go to get their cannabis due to the illegal nature of that substance. People using pot are not doing themselves any favors if they abuse that drug (similar to alcohol abuse). Yet, cannabis usage does not generally result in catastrophic results (without something like a car being involved). 

With the recent shootings, the country has been pondering whether the second amendment is allegedly carried too far if people are allowed, without question, to own or to carry any type of weapon. No one is proposing to take away people’s rights to have a gun, but perhaps, we should consider if particular persons should be allowed to carry certain weapons. (Who is the judge?) Unlike marijuana, guns have been used in far more deaths. Also we know that no simple test will gauge whether a person is sane enough to warrant a purchase. This is evidenced by the recent shooting in Connecticut where the murderer used the weapons purchased by his mother. The shooter was readily taught by his mother to shoot those weapons even though she may not have taught how to plan a mass killing spree. Yet, this son was able to gain access to weapons that murdered an entire first grade class. Aurora, Colorado also saw what can occur when people get access to lots of weapons. Still folks want to say that there should be no prohibitions on weapons of any sort upon firearms. 

 

Each of these discussions shares a concern for the public well-being in contrast to personal liberties. The question is then begged at what point do these converge and which is the preferred position with respect to the convergence. Would legalizing pot allow people to find their substance in less shady places that ultimately lowers exposure to criminal activity or exposure to other more intense substances? This might even lower overall criminal activity. Does the ban on marijuana find justification when a person, wholly sober, can buy any caliber automatic weapon and then use such to destroy the peace of communities?

Most argue the right to bear arms is enshrined for citizens to be able to protect themselves from others and the government. Yet, the most literal interpretation of this amendment might suggest that people should be able to bear nuclear arms without restriction from the federal government. That would be ridiculous to most reasonable people because the ability to inflict harm upon indeterminate numbers of people warrants some limits. If “guns don’t kill people”, how many must die as a result of a firearm usage before there are limits? How many bullied individuals will realize mass murder as a means to end the taunting, threats and harassment before we intervene?

Now, if people are concerned about the criminal elements surrounding a particular element like cannabis, they might want to consider what loan-sharks do around legal gambling. Also today, alcohol is ranked as the third-leading cause of preventable death in America and a leading cause of automobile collisions. Gun usage has been linked to over 70,000 deaths a year (without regard to motive). Yet, cannabis is the one prohibited.

I am not advocating cannabis use, but we need to consider the legitimacy of laws in relevance to the actual impacts and goals of those laws were designed to achieve (e.g. lower crime and a secure public).

All guns do not have to be available to any buyer who wishes them, and their sellers should be willing to ask questions or to refuse service. Possibly, a reasonable thing to do is to follow some of limits on alcohol upon these other areas because we have many laws on the books that limit alcohol use without prohibition. Could this not be extended to cannabis use? Additionally, bartenders can and do refuse service to customers. Bartenders and retailers can also be held accountable for an improper sale that results in a death or serious injury of another. Should we consider the “right to bear arms” versus to sell arms? Should we not also consider the liability of a weapon sale? 

Public well-being collides with personal liberty within written policy statutes and policy desires. Yet, that does not mean we have to be extreme in application especially when statistics show there is a clear difference between the goal and the applied policy. Maybe, we could apply common sense to laws for once. Certain weapons are not a necessity to own, and cannabis is less of a threat than alcohol. How many more senseless and tragic deaths will we have to endure before we realize this?