Kat Blaque makes very good points on the Transgender bathroom debate, and I have highlighted her points below which I have paraphrased from a long video which I will leave a link to her video down below for everyone to watch in full:
1. I don't see genitals in bathrooms because I'm not looking, and I'm only there to relieve myself, and that's how everyone should act in a bathroom.
2. Trans people will always exist, and the real debate around bathrooms is that people don't want trans people to exist.
3. The trans bathroom debate also suggests that trans people will harm women and girls in bathrooms, but the reality is that cis-gender men that are our fathers, husbands, boyfriends, are more likely to abuse women and girls, but we don't have a debate about separating these people in our lives away from women and girls. And actually trans people (trans women especially) are more likely to be assaulted in bathrooms.
The reality is that these people who are debating against bathroom rights are the same people that have never cared about women and children and sexual assault except in this debate to pretend their argument is a moral issue.
And also if a man wanted to sexually assault someone, why would they feel the need to cross dress and pretend to be a woman to get in a women's restroom to do so? And second of all if this was the case, this is not a trans person, this is a cis-gender male committing this crime.
Additionally, if there were transgender bathroom rights, why would that keep people from being punished if they committed that act?
4. No one will make alternative bathrooms around the world--it's not real. People will always use the bathroom that is closest to them, the bathroom that they feel comfortable using, etc. There will be social change that may work towards gender neutral bathrooms.
5. Why are you getting your information about trans people from cis-gender people?
6. It also seems that our society wants trans people to "pass" as the gender they identify, and that's oppressive.
7. Trans people have developed and evolved in so many ways beyond the understanding for a cis person that it's almost not worth explaining trans issues and trans rights. "I have this conversation for so long...your understanding my transness doesn't change my transness."
8. Everybody shits, and everybody pisses, so bathrooms are a necessity for everybody--and the people that hate trans people are those that don't want to share any space. And those people tend to be the Conservative republicans.
And even those people that I dislike (the same people that do things that are destructive) also deserve the right to a bathroom despite my dislike for them.
9. This is an economic, social, and cultural attack on trans people that sends the message that they don't deserve space.
Watch in full here: The Truth Behind Transgender Bathrooms
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Saturday, February 25, 2017
Trash Recycled Art Sculptures (+ NEW BLOG TITLE: ART LANDFILL)
I think it very fitting that I post photos of artwork made from recycled (trash) materials considering I recently changed this blog to Art Landfill. This blog was titled various things such as Edgar Allan Poet, Land of Art, and ART PARTE', and those titles never resonated with me which is why I often changed the blog title. But here I wanted to provide some ideas of the artworks below in the photos to do functional pieces that can utilize recycled materials around you.
First, here are hanging plastic bottles made into delicate ornaments that accent the sky.
This is sweet, but I wonder if the fascination here is because sculptors want a sex robot.
This sculpture has many intricate pieces and the color of materials is a great match work of different elements.
Cool
This wall art design was used with toilet paper rolls, so be sure to save about 200 rolls.
Industrial and cold but full of life in this sculpture.
Hey, I'm partial to fake plants too. This was made out of green plastic bottles.
Made with bicycle parts
Recycled wine corks for a functional recycled chair that is a beautiful piece of art.
A beautiful metal sculpture that accents any yard or garden.
Make your own sculptures out of the recycled trash materials around you. Use materials to create a functional work of art that creates a sense of wonder, creativity, and innovation.
First, here are hanging plastic bottles made into delicate ornaments that accent the sky.
 |
| boredpanda.com |
This is sweet, but I wonder if the fascination here is because sculptors want a sex robot.
 |
| how-to-recycle.blogspot.com |
 |
| how-to-recycle.blogspot.com |
 |
| revisiontheartofrecycling.blogspot.com |
This wall art design was used with toilet paper rolls, so be sure to save about 200 rolls.
 |
| casualhomefurnishings.com |
Industrial and cold but full of life in this sculpture.
 |
| how-to-recycle.blogspot.com |
 |
| thisiscolossal.com |
Made with bicycle parts
 |
| recyclart.org |
Recycled wine corks for a functional recycled chair that is a beautiful piece of art.
 |
| trendhunter.com |
A beautiful metal sculpture that accents any yard or garden.
 |
| farmweld.com.au |
Make your own sculptures out of the recycled trash materials around you. Use materials to create a functional work of art that creates a sense of wonder, creativity, and innovation.
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
Give the people back their land by Cassie Kinney
Not many people know of United States' terrible history in seizing land and exploiting it, nor
do people know the extent to which this affects the present state of
affairs. One thing that impacted people was Land lotteries which
prompted Indian removal. Land lotteries was simply giving away land to
white immigrants like in Georgia.
Another impact was creating systemic racism in the form of African/African American slavery. Even after slavery, Black families were not allowed to get loans to make small payments on property, Blacks were segregated, and now there is a phenomenon now that keeps Blacks segregated called Redlining. There are many systematic factors that contributed and still contribute historically to the racist policies, laws, customs, mores, etc which keeps people of color from owning land in the United States.
Another example of this environmental racism includes deforestation in Central Africa (Congo) and South America, and pollution/contamination (e.g. Flint water crisis) affecting poor people especially people of color, and the global division of labor. People around the globe still face violence, war, poverty, exploitation of land, which is why many people are displaced in this world that want to live in their own home and land in peace. According to Rosenberg (2016) "There are an estimated 11-12 million refugees in the world today. This is a dramatic increase since the mid-1970s when there were less than 3 million refugees worldwide.
However, it is a decrease since the 1992 when the refugee population was nearly 18 million, high due to the Balkan conflicts." The people of Sri Lanka, the people of Syria, the people of Myanmar, the people of Standing Rock, the people of Niger, etc just want their homes back. Roseberg also states that "Some consider the hundreds of thousands of evacuees from Hurricane Katrina in 2005 as Internally Displaced Persons."
Our history has created systematic disadvantages for poor urban and rural people which is why even today there exists a segregation of the worst schools, worst neighborhoods, and worst environmental/housing conditions. Those in rural areas were greatly disenfranchised during the Industrial age in Appalachia because of coal mining and timber companies. For example the expansion of surface mining leveled thousands of acres of mountaintops because the coal industry benefited from mountaintop removal (Eller, 2008.)
Additionally, corporate chains like Wal Mart affect small local businesses in those rural areas of Appalachia, especially when the profits do not trickle down into the community because they go out of the region. The Appalachian Land Ownership Task Force found that large corporations and land companies controlled up to 90 and 100% of the surface land and the mineral resources in 80 Appalachian counties (Eller, 2008.) This was a significant study during this time and it's shocking information. Other data the study found was that 8 million acres—more than 40% of land surveyed—was owned and operated only by 50 private owners and the federal government (Eller, 2008.)
Another example of this is that for 14 West Virginia counties, 25 companies owned 44% of the surface land, yet only assessed for 20% of the area’s taxes (Eller, 2008.) This means that taxes from these large corporations are not going to the community while the poor community pay higher taxes or more taxes to support it's own community. Likewise, these systems of racism has led to the extreme wealth of a select few white families. Today, the median wealth of white families is 20 times greater than the median wealth of black families (and 18 times greater than Latinx families).
Subsequently, some of the programs put in place to aid those disadvantaged did nothing to help disadvantaged people of color. In fact, FDR was able to pass the New Deal including Social security and other beneficial programs, as long as they excluded domestic service workers and agricultural workers (which meant predominantly people of color.) This gave preferential treatment to whites. Secondly, the dream of home ownership granted mortgage loans to Americans, where 98% of all recipients were white. Third, GI bill was passed to give low cost mortgage, living expenses paid, and paid tuition for veterans, which exclusively benefited whites, and excluded black veterans.
Additionally, The 62 of the richest billionaires own half of the world’s poorest populations. Those that have accumulated all the world's resources simultaneously destroy natural resources at an alarming rate. Those richest people are the ones that destroy the land (trees, soil, crops, air, water, animals/aquatic life), those people buy all the land, and try to keep people from being truly free. We do NOT live in a free and equal opportunity country, and it is essential that we (the 99%) take back stolen land, take back our stolen creativity and individuality. In an effort to save, protect, and preserve nature and all its species, we cannot continue to deforest the planet, pollute, and kill off ecosystems.
Moreover, the middle class own more land, but it's usually for farming, growing soybeans or corn for livestock to eat, or for hunting grounds (more family owned operations). I'm not sure how anyone figures they own the oceans, but they also wreak havoc on that too, and capture to exploit and kill aquatic life. Those who own the majority of land on this planet are the rich who exploit it for drilling and fracking, mining, infrastructure, etc. In fact the families who own most of the world's resources are the reason the number of trees has fallen by 46% since the start of human civilization. There are over 20,000 different kinds of trees in the world. Actually, 3 trillion trees are left on the Earth. Somehow these same people who don't own land will go to different countries in Africa or South America to mine for gold. And they too are part of the destruction of land, trees, wildlife, and the last remaining tribes.
As mentioned, all of these examples are the many ways land and resources are taken away from the poor and persons of color, and consequently, this land is often used for big business, corporations, coal mining, logging, or fast food chains. What's truly depressing is that absentee owners of land have taken thousands of acres while rich families keep land in the family for to be passed down through generations. I'm not sure redistributing land (redistributing wealth) is feasible, but it sounds effective. And in fact when I think about the few people that own half of the world, this wealth disparity is unfair, and simply unjust. This cannot be normal, this cannot be how the system works. There is much land to be "bought" but there is much land already owned on a large scale.
Simply, if all people were given land to build their own houses and grow their own food, there would be less corporations, less logging, mining, fracking, pollution, etc. If all people had an acre, no one would want to cut down all the trees on their property for a quick buck. People would perhaps use their land to make a home business and then this would create a local economy where everyone had a service to offer.
This isn't about poor people paying taxes, because in fact the tax system is not fair for the poor to begin with. Poor people shouldn't pay taxes, only the rich! Poor people pay the same tax rate as the rich, if not more taxes. And something most people don't realize is that half of the US budget goes to funding the military. So, clearly the tax system is not fair for the poor, but it should be used to regulate the rich because they are clearly exploiting people, resources, polluting land, and those are the people that came from money that was passed down to them through the generations of a system that favored the imperialist white supremacist capitalist patriarchy.
I am one of the many people who do not own land. Even if I bought land, I still do not "own" any of the trees, the sky, the birds, the deer, the soil, rocks, and rivers. People often talk in terms of ownership like "my girlfriend", "my daughter," "our Earth", "our galaxy", "my America." I find this to be problematic because this suggests that we have a culture that cannot look outside of capitalism, imperialism, and colonization. I fear that if the culture continues to use rhetoric that reflects ownership and possession, then it will be one where the disparities, inequality, destruction will be even greater as civilization ages within this world. But, if those of us don't collectively buy up land to take away from capitalists, then what will be left for those of us that want to protect it? True equality is the providing access to healthy living conditions, healthy food and land to grow food, and education for everyone.
References:
Eller, Ronald. D. (2008). Uneven Ground: Appalachia Since 1945. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press.
Rosenberg, Matt. (2016). Refugees: The Global Refugee and Internally Displaced Persons Situation. ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/global-refugees-overview-1434952
Another impact was creating systemic racism in the form of African/African American slavery. Even after slavery, Black families were not allowed to get loans to make small payments on property, Blacks were segregated, and now there is a phenomenon now that keeps Blacks segregated called Redlining. There are many systematic factors that contributed and still contribute historically to the racist policies, laws, customs, mores, etc which keeps people of color from owning land in the United States.
Another example of this environmental racism includes deforestation in Central Africa (Congo) and South America, and pollution/contamination (e.g. Flint water crisis) affecting poor people especially people of color, and the global division of labor. People around the globe still face violence, war, poverty, exploitation of land, which is why many people are displaced in this world that want to live in their own home and land in peace. According to Rosenberg (2016) "There are an estimated 11-12 million refugees in the world today. This is a dramatic increase since the mid-1970s when there were less than 3 million refugees worldwide.
However, it is a decrease since the 1992 when the refugee population was nearly 18 million, high due to the Balkan conflicts." The people of Sri Lanka, the people of Syria, the people of Myanmar, the people of Standing Rock, the people of Niger, etc just want their homes back. Roseberg also states that "Some consider the hundreds of thousands of evacuees from Hurricane Katrina in 2005 as Internally Displaced Persons."
Our history has created systematic disadvantages for poor urban and rural people which is why even today there exists a segregation of the worst schools, worst neighborhoods, and worst environmental/housing conditions. Those in rural areas were greatly disenfranchised during the Industrial age in Appalachia because of coal mining and timber companies. For example the expansion of surface mining leveled thousands of acres of mountaintops because the coal industry benefited from mountaintop removal (Eller, 2008.)
Additionally, corporate chains like Wal Mart affect small local businesses in those rural areas of Appalachia, especially when the profits do not trickle down into the community because they go out of the region. The Appalachian Land Ownership Task Force found that large corporations and land companies controlled up to 90 and 100% of the surface land and the mineral resources in 80 Appalachian counties (Eller, 2008.) This was a significant study during this time and it's shocking information. Other data the study found was that 8 million acres—more than 40% of land surveyed—was owned and operated only by 50 private owners and the federal government (Eller, 2008.)
Another example of this is that for 14 West Virginia counties, 25 companies owned 44% of the surface land, yet only assessed for 20% of the area’s taxes (Eller, 2008.) This means that taxes from these large corporations are not going to the community while the poor community pay higher taxes or more taxes to support it's own community. Likewise, these systems of racism has led to the extreme wealth of a select few white families. Today, the median wealth of white families is 20 times greater than the median wealth of black families (and 18 times greater than Latinx families).
Subsequently, some of the programs put in place to aid those disadvantaged did nothing to help disadvantaged people of color. In fact, FDR was able to pass the New Deal including Social security and other beneficial programs, as long as they excluded domestic service workers and agricultural workers (which meant predominantly people of color.) This gave preferential treatment to whites. Secondly, the dream of home ownership granted mortgage loans to Americans, where 98% of all recipients were white. Third, GI bill was passed to give low cost mortgage, living expenses paid, and paid tuition for veterans, which exclusively benefited whites, and excluded black veterans.
Additionally, The 62 of the richest billionaires own half of the world’s poorest populations. Those that have accumulated all the world's resources simultaneously destroy natural resources at an alarming rate. Those richest people are the ones that destroy the land (trees, soil, crops, air, water, animals/aquatic life), those people buy all the land, and try to keep people from being truly free. We do NOT live in a free and equal opportunity country, and it is essential that we (the 99%) take back stolen land, take back our stolen creativity and individuality. In an effort to save, protect, and preserve nature and all its species, we cannot continue to deforest the planet, pollute, and kill off ecosystems.
Moreover, the middle class own more land, but it's usually for farming, growing soybeans or corn for livestock to eat, or for hunting grounds (more family owned operations). I'm not sure how anyone figures they own the oceans, but they also wreak havoc on that too, and capture to exploit and kill aquatic life. Those who own the majority of land on this planet are the rich who exploit it for drilling and fracking, mining, infrastructure, etc. In fact the families who own most of the world's resources are the reason the number of trees has fallen by 46% since the start of human civilization. There are over 20,000 different kinds of trees in the world. Actually, 3 trillion trees are left on the Earth. Somehow these same people who don't own land will go to different countries in Africa or South America to mine for gold. And they too are part of the destruction of land, trees, wildlife, and the last remaining tribes.
As mentioned, all of these examples are the many ways land and resources are taken away from the poor and persons of color, and consequently, this land is often used for big business, corporations, coal mining, logging, or fast food chains. What's truly depressing is that absentee owners of land have taken thousands of acres while rich families keep land in the family for to be passed down through generations. I'm not sure redistributing land (redistributing wealth) is feasible, but it sounds effective. And in fact when I think about the few people that own half of the world, this wealth disparity is unfair, and simply unjust. This cannot be normal, this cannot be how the system works. There is much land to be "bought" but there is much land already owned on a large scale.
Simply, if all people were given land to build their own houses and grow their own food, there would be less corporations, less logging, mining, fracking, pollution, etc. If all people had an acre, no one would want to cut down all the trees on their property for a quick buck. People would perhaps use their land to make a home business and then this would create a local economy where everyone had a service to offer.
This isn't about poor people paying taxes, because in fact the tax system is not fair for the poor to begin with. Poor people shouldn't pay taxes, only the rich! Poor people pay the same tax rate as the rich, if not more taxes. And something most people don't realize is that half of the US budget goes to funding the military. So, clearly the tax system is not fair for the poor, but it should be used to regulate the rich because they are clearly exploiting people, resources, polluting land, and those are the people that came from money that was passed down to them through the generations of a system that favored the imperialist white supremacist capitalist patriarchy.
I am one of the many people who do not own land. Even if I bought land, I still do not "own" any of the trees, the sky, the birds, the deer, the soil, rocks, and rivers. People often talk in terms of ownership like "my girlfriend", "my daughter," "our Earth", "our galaxy", "my America." I find this to be problematic because this suggests that we have a culture that cannot look outside of capitalism, imperialism, and colonization. I fear that if the culture continues to use rhetoric that reflects ownership and possession, then it will be one where the disparities, inequality, destruction will be even greater as civilization ages within this world. But, if those of us don't collectively buy up land to take away from capitalists, then what will be left for those of us that want to protect it? True equality is the providing access to healthy living conditions, healthy food and land to grow food, and education for everyone.
References:
Eller, Ronald. D. (2008). Uneven Ground: Appalachia Since 1945. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press.
Rosenberg, Matt. (2016). Refugees: The Global Refugee and Internally Displaced Persons Situation. ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/global-refugees-overview-1434952
Monday, February 20, 2017
#KurtCobain A Conversation about Depression & Suicide by Cassie K
Yesterday was my birthday, and earlier I wrote a bit about this short life I've had and moments in my life I remember. In that writing I said when I was 15 years old and listening to Nirvana, "I thought killing yourself like Kurt Cobain was cool." I did not mention that I also thought Cobain's drug use was cool. But first, I will say that suicide isn't cool or trendy. And I don't know if Kurt Cobain actually killed himself, because there is contrary evidence, which I have interpreted from a recent documentary, and I'm still not sure. When I saw that Kurt Cobain was trending now because it was his birthday, I recollected that I had once known his birthday was a day after mine, and also I realized that I turned the same age Cobain killed himself. I was reminded that I too have had an increasing feeling of depression from the
time I was 15, and at one time I was afraid that my suicidal thoughts were influenced by Kurt Cobain and other musicians that ended up killing them self.
I realized that there have been so many times in my life that have led me to want to die. Actually once in my life I got into a car accident and later thought to myself: "I wish I had died that day." That is the destructive workings of depression. During times when my depression was at its worst, I just wanted to die. Those thoughts and feelings come and go. Although I couldn't imagine a life an additional 27 years, I couldn't imagine ending life when it is connected to so many people that I care for.
Suicidal thoughts don't necessarily have to come from long term depression, or from trauma, addiction, because some end their life in certain sudden shocking events. Some people that know they're going to prison will kill them selves if their crime was particularly incriminating. Some people will do so like those suicides from Ashley Madison hack list that revealed people that were paying to have affairs. But here, I am specifically speaking on a few thoughts and feelings I have about depression and suicide on this topic.
For one I think: "is everybody depressed?" "Does depression affect the masses?" or "is depression so widespread that it's normal or natural?" or "is depression made up?" or "is depression a privileged attitude against actual pain and struggle thrusted on others?" I don't have the answers to those questions, however, I know from speaking with many people with depression, they feel conflicted by having pain that hinders them while other people are trying to flee war torn countries, or citizens that don't have access to shelter or clean drinking water. And, I ask: "do these people call their pain 'depression'?" I have no clue, and I would assume those same people do not think about 'depression' and instead see their situation as 'oppression.'
The opposite of depression seems to be happiness, so I turn to the question if I had it "all" if this would make me feel complete or happy, or at least the opposite of depression. I wonder if I had all the things that I consider would make me a complete person if I would still be depressed. In fact when I hear that celebrities with fame, fortune, friends, and adventure that have depression or commit suicide, I think to myself: "oh this will never be the end of it for me." I go further and ask: maybe life isn't about being happy, and life doesn't require me to be happy to live it. This is my own inner conflict.
Another thing I've realized by speaking with people with depression is that they've tried it "all" to help cure themselves from depression. If you've read any of my writings on this blog, you can probably sense the depression. And, I'm one of these people that have tried it 'all' except prescription drugs (or any pills) and I have never had therapy. I have used hallucinogenic/psychedelic drugs (which have been said to help cure depression and suicidal thoughts and PTSD); but that doesn't help. I tried exercising and doing yoga with the addition of meditation, and that didn't work either. Of course I went Vegan in 2005 when my depression "started", but when I was feeling very depressed years ago, I tried eating more Raw specifically a fruitarian-based diet, with the hope that this would elevate my mood but that didn't help as expected. Some people thought the documentary and book "The Secret" was the answer to overcoming your struggles and barriers in your life.
What I've noticed that helps the most is Sunshine, Nature, and a warm Summer day. Nothing really compares to a lovely Summer day to make me feel whole, complete, or happy. However I found myself last Summer in the throws of depression harder than ever. It's silly, and hard to admit, but last Summer as I was sitting in my garden with all the plants I grew around me, and the sun beaming down on me--I should have felt bliss but instead I was sobbing for weeks. There is one big realization I made which really pressed me into a breakdown...to the point I wanted to die. With this realization, I told the people that were closest to me, so I feel relieved at the moment.
There was a specific reason for the sobbing as mentioned, and I speculate if this 'thing' is part of my depression. But I still say that my depression and others' stems from many personal experiences, attitudes, lifestyle, illness, events, and much more.
One thing that was a tremendous help for me was that I started writing about my narrative and how that creates my sense of identity. So as I was writing out my history, I realized many things about myself that I had forgotten. One of those things I realized that I had been sexually assaulted in times of my life, and realized I had anxieties about these things which affect my personal life.
Of course there are things I write but don't post, and there are things that I think but don't write; but I write at least to write out my pain...like casting it out to the abyss or whatever. Remember that you really don't know a person even when you're the closest person to them. Furthermore, you don't really know how a person is feeling when someone appears well put-together, professional, happy, confident, or successful, because they are human that can still be suffering from pain like anyone else. Remember that you don't have all the answers to those around you who suffer from depression and suicidal thoughts. Remember that this is a sensitive subject, and that you cannot invalidate peoples' pain.
I realized that there have been so many times in my life that have led me to want to die. Actually once in my life I got into a car accident and later thought to myself: "I wish I had died that day." That is the destructive workings of depression. During times when my depression was at its worst, I just wanted to die. Those thoughts and feelings come and go. Although I couldn't imagine a life an additional 27 years, I couldn't imagine ending life when it is connected to so many people that I care for.
Suicidal thoughts don't necessarily have to come from long term depression, or from trauma, addiction, because some end their life in certain sudden shocking events. Some people that know they're going to prison will kill them selves if their crime was particularly incriminating. Some people will do so like those suicides from Ashley Madison hack list that revealed people that were paying to have affairs. But here, I am specifically speaking on a few thoughts and feelings I have about depression and suicide on this topic.
For one I think: "is everybody depressed?" "Does depression affect the masses?" or "is depression so widespread that it's normal or natural?" or "is depression made up?" or "is depression a privileged attitude against actual pain and struggle thrusted on others?" I don't have the answers to those questions, however, I know from speaking with many people with depression, they feel conflicted by having pain that hinders them while other people are trying to flee war torn countries, or citizens that don't have access to shelter or clean drinking water. And, I ask: "do these people call their pain 'depression'?" I have no clue, and I would assume those same people do not think about 'depression' and instead see their situation as 'oppression.'
The opposite of depression seems to be happiness, so I turn to the question if I had it "all" if this would make me feel complete or happy, or at least the opposite of depression. I wonder if I had all the things that I consider would make me a complete person if I would still be depressed. In fact when I hear that celebrities with fame, fortune, friends, and adventure that have depression or commit suicide, I think to myself: "oh this will never be the end of it for me." I go further and ask: maybe life isn't about being happy, and life doesn't require me to be happy to live it. This is my own inner conflict.
Another thing I've realized by speaking with people with depression is that they've tried it "all" to help cure themselves from depression. If you've read any of my writings on this blog, you can probably sense the depression. And, I'm one of these people that have tried it 'all' except prescription drugs (or any pills) and I have never had therapy. I have used hallucinogenic/psychedelic drugs (which have been said to help cure depression and suicidal thoughts and PTSD); but that doesn't help. I tried exercising and doing yoga with the addition of meditation, and that didn't work either. Of course I went Vegan in 2005 when my depression "started", but when I was feeling very depressed years ago, I tried eating more Raw specifically a fruitarian-based diet, with the hope that this would elevate my mood but that didn't help as expected. Some people thought the documentary and book "The Secret" was the answer to overcoming your struggles and barriers in your life.
What I've noticed that helps the most is Sunshine, Nature, and a warm Summer day. Nothing really compares to a lovely Summer day to make me feel whole, complete, or happy. However I found myself last Summer in the throws of depression harder than ever. It's silly, and hard to admit, but last Summer as I was sitting in my garden with all the plants I grew around me, and the sun beaming down on me--I should have felt bliss but instead I was sobbing for weeks. There is one big realization I made which really pressed me into a breakdown...to the point I wanted to die. With this realization, I told the people that were closest to me, so I feel relieved at the moment.
There was a specific reason for the sobbing as mentioned, and I speculate if this 'thing' is part of my depression. But I still say that my depression and others' stems from many personal experiences, attitudes, lifestyle, illness, events, and much more.
One thing that was a tremendous help for me was that I started writing about my narrative and how that creates my sense of identity. So as I was writing out my history, I realized many things about myself that I had forgotten. One of those things I realized that I had been sexually assaulted in times of my life, and realized I had anxieties about these things which affect my personal life.
Of course there are things I write but don't post, and there are things that I think but don't write; but I write at least to write out my pain...like casting it out to the abyss or whatever. Remember that you really don't know a person even when you're the closest person to them. Furthermore, you don't really know how a person is feeling when someone appears well put-together, professional, happy, confident, or successful, because they are human that can still be suffering from pain like anyone else. Remember that you don't have all the answers to those around you who suffer from depression and suicidal thoughts. Remember that this is a sensitive subject, and that you cannot invalidate peoples' pain.
Land Lotteries
Of The Cherokee Removal: A Brief History with Documents by Theda Purdue and Michael D. Green: "Confronted with Cherokee refusal to negotiate removal, Georgia began awarding Cherokee land to its citizens in an attempt to force the Cherokees out. Thousands of white settlers, who believed that they had legitimate title to land, moved into the Cherokee Nation.
"Georgia had a well-established method for distributing public lands which, the state insisted, included Cherokee territory. Male residents of the state as well as widows and orphans registered for land lotteries, and certain categories of people, such as veterans, could register twice. Surveyors partitioned the land into plots and prepared plats, or maps, for each of these plots. Lottery officials pulled a name out of one hopper and a plat out of another, thereby matching winner and prize. The winner paid only a small filing fee for his or her acreage. Unlike the later federal homestead law that required people to settle the land they claimed, Georgia's lotteries placed no restrictions on the winners...As a result, lottery winners or those who bought land from winners swarmed into the Cherokee Nation." (pg. 92-93.)
"Georgia had a well-established method for distributing public lands which, the state insisted, included Cherokee territory. Male residents of the state as well as widows and orphans registered for land lotteries, and certain categories of people, such as veterans, could register twice. Surveyors partitioned the land into plots and prepared plats, or maps, for each of these plots. Lottery officials pulled a name out of one hopper and a plat out of another, thereby matching winner and prize. The winner paid only a small filing fee for his or her acreage. Unlike the later federal homestead law that required people to settle the land they claimed, Georgia's lotteries placed no restrictions on the winners...As a result, lottery winners or those who bought land from winners swarmed into the Cherokee Nation." (pg. 92-93.)
Saturday, February 11, 2017
Old photos of my great grandparents & their family
 |
| This photo of my great grandma Lucy when she was young is like looking at my mother at her age now |
Friday, February 10, 2017
Abortion facts and misconceptions/myths (& F**k You Matt Bevins of Kentucky!)
The governor of Kentucky, Matt Bevins, just passed a bill in my home state that says that it is a requirement to show women the ultrasound of the fetus before the abortion. For one, that is a waste of money using an ultrasound, but it is also unethical. Another terrible policy passed was to ban abortions after 20 weeks. Days into
2017, my home state has passed egregious bills to reverse progress in
human rights. The same people that
want to separate church and state for the purposes of avoiding taxing
their churches are the same people that want to impose their religious
ideologies into state politics. But the right wing politicians not only use their religion to justify violating human rights, they use highly offensive myths that perpetuate misconceptions about abortion and people that need abortions. Here, I will discuss the ways politicians and people use their misconceptions to argue against a person's right to make decisions about their own body. Below is a list of myths about abortions that everyone needs to know.
There is a misconception that abortion is a sad and disheartening moment for a woman. Of course that may be true for some, but generally abortion is for those who are in desperate need and are thankful to have the procedure done when it's over. There is an assumption that people will regret an abortion, and recently with the anti-abortion march this year there were people at the march that stated they regretted their decision, but most do not regret this decision. There is much ignorant rhetoric by the anti-choice groups, and one of those is the view that abortion is "baby killing." A baby and a fetus are different where the baby has been birthed and is living outside of the mother, while a fetus is more like a 'thing' that is developing because of the mother. Therefore the fetus is part of the person and they should be the only one to make the decisions about their body.
The rhetoric additionally tends to be gendered where it is thought that only women need access to an abortion. One could say that the partner also needs an abortion, but here I am specifically speaking about Trans men who need abortions. This is not hard to understand: Trans men can get pregnant even when taking T (testosterone), so clearly cis gender women are not the only people that need access to abortion.
Furthermore, I often ask myself if we would be having these cultural and political conversation if cis gender men gave birth, needed birth control or needed access to an abortion. But I am not going to spend time on this thought because Gloria Steinem and other feminists have asked this before.
A second misconception is that foster care is a better option. But that means that the person is forced to carry till birth and give the child away. There are so many children in foster care. Children's Rights states that "In 2015, over 670,000 children spent time in U.S. foster care [62,000 waiting to be adopted]. On average, children remain in state care for nearly two years and six percent of children in foster care have languished there for five or more years. Despite the common perception that the majority of children in foster care are very young, the average age of kids in care is nearly 9." More Black men are incarcerated today than were enslaved in 1850 according to Michelle Alexander, which could be affecting more than half of children entering U.S. foster care who were young people of color according to Children's Rights.
There is limited research on those who choose to foster children and the living conditions of those children who are fostered. I knew two parents that were both bus drivers and they had taken in a couple foster children while living in terrible conditions and caring for their other children. At one time I would have that they needed an extra check to care for their other children. This is not to say that fostering is bad, and actually I admire those who foster for the right reasons (not for money, and not for their ego.) Research on foster care conditions will have to be further explored, and there is much to be said on this subject, but I have exhausted this point enough.
The third misconception is that late term abortion are common. They are not. And actually those who get late term abortions are those who intended to carry the child to birth and ended up having complications from the pregnancy. Thus they needed an abortion because the baby would die anyway, or the person would suffer health risks. Most abortions are done in the first couple of weeks when a person realizes their pregnant. Actually as soon as they find out they're pregnant is usually when they schedule for the appointment. Some doctors and researchers suggest that the fetus "feels pain" after 24 weeks and consciousness is developed in the third trimester, but this argument is useless because then you would have to also consider the 'life' of sperm, which has been observed smelling its way to eggs!
Next, one myth about abortions is that they are on the rise when this is not true either. The abortion rate has been on the decline for years, and hit its lowest level in 2011, according to the latest data available from the Guttmacher Institute. There are many reasons for this, one being the greater acceptance and use of a variety of birth control methods, but another could be the fact that access to abortion is not easy. Another fact that the Guttmacher Institute states is that 61% of people who had abortions in 2008 were parents, and 34% had two or more children. This statistic was higher between then and 2011. This is interesting because this is counter to the common narrative of an abortion client as the clueless, young, unmarried girl. If this myth was the case though, there is even more of a reason to make abortion services more accessible. There are many barriers to this procedure and one of those barriers is the location when many people would have to drive 3 or more hours away to have the procedure done. One other barrier is the restrictive standards of abortion clinics. So with all of this considered, seeking an abortion would be an even greater obstacle for someone that felt alone, had no money or transportation.
Another myth is that tax funds is used for abortions, but this is not the case. Tax funds may go to organizations that offer this service, but there is audits that make sure that tax funds do not go towards abortion services. The dialogue around defunding Planned Parenthood is that there is a belief that most citizens are anti-abortion, when in fact the majority of people across the US believe that abortion should remain legal and accessible for everyone. I find it extremely inconsistent that groups that call themselves 'pro-life' when banning or making it harder to get abortion services will actually kill more people because of the dangerous alternatives to an abortion. What's more, some believe that simply banning abortion (much like banning or criminalizing anything) will stop it from happening. Abortion is illegal in many places around the globe, and this is connected to the fact that people in those places are dying due to unsafe conditions and procedures. What would happen instead here in America is that people would be seeking out dangerous alternatives.
The take away message here is that people should not be forced to give birth when they don't want to, can't afford it, are not ready-- and all reasons for an abortion are valid. People should have the right to make decisions about their body, including the right to safe, accessible, affordable health care (which should include abortion services). These laws and bills greatly affect the vast majority of people. I have used Plan B several times, and that's luckily due to the fact that I had access to this product at the nearest Wal-Mart, so in those moments I think to myself: I am 'at risk' of needing an abortion in my lifetime (especially because I am choosing to never have children.) I had my partner go in and buy Plan B all those times so I wouldn't to be seen buying it at midnight or early in the morning, or running into anyone I knew--even though it shouldn't be stigmatized for being a normal human animal.
There is a misconception that abortion is a sad and disheartening moment for a woman. Of course that may be true for some, but generally abortion is for those who are in desperate need and are thankful to have the procedure done when it's over. There is an assumption that people will regret an abortion, and recently with the anti-abortion march this year there were people at the march that stated they regretted their decision, but most do not regret this decision. There is much ignorant rhetoric by the anti-choice groups, and one of those is the view that abortion is "baby killing." A baby and a fetus are different where the baby has been birthed and is living outside of the mother, while a fetus is more like a 'thing' that is developing because of the mother. Therefore the fetus is part of the person and they should be the only one to make the decisions about their body.
The rhetoric additionally tends to be gendered where it is thought that only women need access to an abortion. One could say that the partner also needs an abortion, but here I am specifically speaking about Trans men who need abortions. This is not hard to understand: Trans men can get pregnant even when taking T (testosterone), so clearly cis gender women are not the only people that need access to abortion.
Furthermore, I often ask myself if we would be having these cultural and political conversation if cis gender men gave birth, needed birth control or needed access to an abortion. But I am not going to spend time on this thought because Gloria Steinem and other feminists have asked this before.
A second misconception is that foster care is a better option. But that means that the person is forced to carry till birth and give the child away. There are so many children in foster care. Children's Rights states that "In 2015, over 670,000 children spent time in U.S. foster care [62,000 waiting to be adopted]. On average, children remain in state care for nearly two years and six percent of children in foster care have languished there for five or more years. Despite the common perception that the majority of children in foster care are very young, the average age of kids in care is nearly 9." More Black men are incarcerated today than were enslaved in 1850 according to Michelle Alexander, which could be affecting more than half of children entering U.S. foster care who were young people of color according to Children's Rights.
There is limited research on those who choose to foster children and the living conditions of those children who are fostered. I knew two parents that were both bus drivers and they had taken in a couple foster children while living in terrible conditions and caring for their other children. At one time I would have that they needed an extra check to care for their other children. This is not to say that fostering is bad, and actually I admire those who foster for the right reasons (not for money, and not for their ego.) Research on foster care conditions will have to be further explored, and there is much to be said on this subject, but I have exhausted this point enough.
The third misconception is that late term abortion are common. They are not. And actually those who get late term abortions are those who intended to carry the child to birth and ended up having complications from the pregnancy. Thus they needed an abortion because the baby would die anyway, or the person would suffer health risks. Most abortions are done in the first couple of weeks when a person realizes their pregnant. Actually as soon as they find out they're pregnant is usually when they schedule for the appointment. Some doctors and researchers suggest that the fetus "feels pain" after 24 weeks and consciousness is developed in the third trimester, but this argument is useless because then you would have to also consider the 'life' of sperm, which has been observed smelling its way to eggs!
Next, one myth about abortions is that they are on the rise when this is not true either. The abortion rate has been on the decline for years, and hit its lowest level in 2011, according to the latest data available from the Guttmacher Institute. There are many reasons for this, one being the greater acceptance and use of a variety of birth control methods, but another could be the fact that access to abortion is not easy. Another fact that the Guttmacher Institute states is that 61% of people who had abortions in 2008 were parents, and 34% had two or more children. This statistic was higher between then and 2011. This is interesting because this is counter to the common narrative of an abortion client as the clueless, young, unmarried girl. If this myth was the case though, there is even more of a reason to make abortion services more accessible. There are many barriers to this procedure and one of those barriers is the location when many people would have to drive 3 or more hours away to have the procedure done. One other barrier is the restrictive standards of abortion clinics. So with all of this considered, seeking an abortion would be an even greater obstacle for someone that felt alone, had no money or transportation.
Another myth is that tax funds is used for abortions, but this is not the case. Tax funds may go to organizations that offer this service, but there is audits that make sure that tax funds do not go towards abortion services. The dialogue around defunding Planned Parenthood is that there is a belief that most citizens are anti-abortion, when in fact the majority of people across the US believe that abortion should remain legal and accessible for everyone. I find it extremely inconsistent that groups that call themselves 'pro-life' when banning or making it harder to get abortion services will actually kill more people because of the dangerous alternatives to an abortion. What's more, some believe that simply banning abortion (much like banning or criminalizing anything) will stop it from happening. Abortion is illegal in many places around the globe, and this is connected to the fact that people in those places are dying due to unsafe conditions and procedures. What would happen instead here in America is that people would be seeking out dangerous alternatives.
The take away message here is that people should not be forced to give birth when they don't want to, can't afford it, are not ready-- and all reasons for an abortion are valid. People should have the right to make decisions about their body, including the right to safe, accessible, affordable health care (which should include abortion services). These laws and bills greatly affect the vast majority of people. I have used Plan B several times, and that's luckily due to the fact that I had access to this product at the nearest Wal-Mart, so in those moments I think to myself: I am 'at risk' of needing an abortion in my lifetime (especially because I am choosing to never have children.) I had my partner go in and buy Plan B all those times so I wouldn't to be seen buying it at midnight or early in the morning, or running into anyone I knew--even though it shouldn't be stigmatized for being a normal human animal.
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Is Fashion part of the revolution? -Cassie K
First, when I say "revolution" I am referring to a movement that overthrows the old system that is in place globally (and particularly in America.) The system currently is based on an Imperialist, White Supremacist, Capitalist, Patriarchy that aims to manipulate those that are most affected by the constructs of race, class, gender, and sexuality. Revolution aims to overthrow this system for a vision of freedom, justice, equality, bliss and happiness. There are many parts of a
revolution that may not be necessary while they are greatly effective in presenting messages. I have seen Emma Goldman extensively quoted over her famous line "If I can't dance to it, it's not my revolution" or "If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution." And I have seen others contend that humor must be part of the revolution. I'm not sure if someone said this first, but I know for sure many have said this, including bell hooks. But I have yet to see fashion as a part of a revolution--although I am sure many activists that do fashion work feel that fashion displays a statement--hence "fashion statement."
Being a fashionable person does in fact turn heads and catches eyes. Could you imagine a parade, show, or any entertainment without fashion? I find that in protest, those who really shine are those that get recognition. And in the wake of political chaos at the height of capitalism, fashion has become part of the many ways we as a society express messages. For instance I have seen T-shirts recently that read "the future is female", "this is what a feminist looks like", and some new clothes and accessories are using phrases from 45's campaign to work against his own hateful message and turning these clothes into ways of raising money, like Samantha Bee's show who made shirts reading "Bad dude" and "Nasty woman" which aims to raise money for refugees. The Human Rights Campaign made hats that replicated the look of 45's campaign slogan and turned it into "Make American Gay Again" which puts their proceeds into research and other projects. (Mind you the 'Make America Great Again' is just as silly of a notion because America was never and has never been great, nor has it ever been gay.)
When I consider the way men are harassed for wearing dresses, makeup, or anything frilly is a sign of how fashion can be controversial. One of the biggest ways fashion has become revolutionary is how men and women dress to express fluidity of gender roles and norms. One of the biggest conversations on the way women dress has been discussed in relation to provoking rape. Many Conservative-Republican-Christians believed that the way a woman dresses influences her chances of getting raped--and that she was asking for it. And I must ask to that: What were men wearing that they got raped? I suppose men are forgotten from that perspective, and are not seen as the victims. I hope now that we have had a public, and global, conversation about this, that has made them think otherwise. I hope they ask themselves instead: Why are men raping? rather than Why are women dressed this way in the first place?
Once, a professor asked the class how to prevent or stop sexual harassment, and many people gave ideas, but I wanted to be silly, so I said: "Get a T-shirt that says 'Don't fuck with me'." Considering almost the entire class laughed, I must suggest that the T-shirt idea wasn't a 'bad' one.
Beyond the political messages, fashion can be your hair, ink tattoos, piercings, makeup, or any accessories that act as a tool to express identity and lifestyle. Growing up, I was fashionably bizarre. Every outfit I wore was mixed-matched clothing, and there are hundreds of pictures to prove it. Trust me, I had wild taste, and looking back on those photos I understand why I had interesting taste throughout my adolescents. Now that I look back on my style, I was dressing in such a way that conveyed a personal expression about myself. You could describe my style by a timeline from 2002 wearing shirts that had absurd writings, and slicked back hair like Draco Malfoy from Harry Potter. When I got into high school, I started buying my own clothes from Goodwill--dressing Grunge at 15, Emo at 16, 1960s-mod at 17, and rather plain at 18. When I was in college I dressed particularly layered with all kinds of hoodies with overcoats and high tops. Because I was a secretary on campus, I tried to dress appropriate on those days.
And as I said, I have always conveyed a personal expression (feeling or mood) with my wardrobe, so how I dress now reflects a level of maturity and clothing items that are functional. I describe these styles I have had because when I constantly changed my appearance, people were questioning my clothing choices. "So, you're a skater now?" someone would say. Or when I wore flannels for several days I was asked "Are you a lesbian now?" Every style I presented reflected a sense of rebellion. When I dyed my hair, when I grew it out or cut it off-- this symbolized for me my point of transformation at every stage in my life. In a way, these were things I did to reject the normal style of living, dressing, and presenting myself.
Being a fashionable person does in fact turn heads and catches eyes. Could you imagine a parade, show, or any entertainment without fashion? I find that in protest, those who really shine are those that get recognition. And in the wake of political chaos at the height of capitalism, fashion has become part of the many ways we as a society express messages. For instance I have seen T-shirts recently that read "the future is female", "this is what a feminist looks like", and some new clothes and accessories are using phrases from 45's campaign to work against his own hateful message and turning these clothes into ways of raising money, like Samantha Bee's show who made shirts reading "Bad dude" and "Nasty woman" which aims to raise money for refugees. The Human Rights Campaign made hats that replicated the look of 45's campaign slogan and turned it into "Make American Gay Again" which puts their proceeds into research and other projects. (Mind you the 'Make America Great Again' is just as silly of a notion because America was never and has never been great, nor has it ever been gay.)
When I consider the way men are harassed for wearing dresses, makeup, or anything frilly is a sign of how fashion can be controversial. One of the biggest ways fashion has become revolutionary is how men and women dress to express fluidity of gender roles and norms. One of the biggest conversations on the way women dress has been discussed in relation to provoking rape. Many Conservative-Republican-Christians believed that the way a woman dresses influences her chances of getting raped--and that she was asking for it. And I must ask to that: What were men wearing that they got raped? I suppose men are forgotten from that perspective, and are not seen as the victims. I hope now that we have had a public, and global, conversation about this, that has made them think otherwise. I hope they ask themselves instead: Why are men raping? rather than Why are women dressed this way in the first place?
Once, a professor asked the class how to prevent or stop sexual harassment, and many people gave ideas, but I wanted to be silly, so I said: "Get a T-shirt that says 'Don't fuck with me'." Considering almost the entire class laughed, I must suggest that the T-shirt idea wasn't a 'bad' one.
Beyond the political messages, fashion can be your hair, ink tattoos, piercings, makeup, or any accessories that act as a tool to express identity and lifestyle. Growing up, I was fashionably bizarre. Every outfit I wore was mixed-matched clothing, and there are hundreds of pictures to prove it. Trust me, I had wild taste, and looking back on those photos I understand why I had interesting taste throughout my adolescents. Now that I look back on my style, I was dressing in such a way that conveyed a personal expression about myself. You could describe my style by a timeline from 2002 wearing shirts that had absurd writings, and slicked back hair like Draco Malfoy from Harry Potter. When I got into high school, I started buying my own clothes from Goodwill--dressing Grunge at 15, Emo at 16, 1960s-mod at 17, and rather plain at 18. When I was in college I dressed particularly layered with all kinds of hoodies with overcoats and high tops. Because I was a secretary on campus, I tried to dress appropriate on those days.
And as I said, I have always conveyed a personal expression (feeling or mood) with my wardrobe, so how I dress now reflects a level of maturity and clothing items that are functional. I describe these styles I have had because when I constantly changed my appearance, people were questioning my clothing choices. "So, you're a skater now?" someone would say. Or when I wore flannels for several days I was asked "Are you a lesbian now?" Every style I presented reflected a sense of rebellion. When I dyed my hair, when I grew it out or cut it off-- this symbolized for me my point of transformation at every stage in my life. In a way, these were things I did to reject the normal style of living, dressing, and presenting myself.
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
The connection between Indian Removal/Andrew Jackson & DAPL/Muslim Ban/Trump (45)
Of cousre what 45 is doing is not the same as Andrew Jackson's plan to force Native people to the West. But, as I was reading The Cherokee Removal: A Brief History with Documents by Theda Perdue and Michael D. Green, I found this paragraph that reminded me of the connection between the Indian Removal and Andrew Jackson and 45's passing of DAPL (and Keystone) in addition to the Muslim Ban:
"In 1829, soon after the inauguration of Andrew Jackson, the Cherokee National Council petitioned the president for protection from Georgia's legislation. Citing provisions in the treaties and the Trade and Intercourse Acts, the council called on Jackson to fulfill his obligation to protect them from encroachment and interference in their domestic affairs. Jackson responded by defending Georgia's claim to sovereignty and offered the Cherokees two choices: Accept Georgia law or move west." (p. 73-74.)
"In 1829, soon after the inauguration of Andrew Jackson, the Cherokee National Council petitioned the president for protection from Georgia's legislation. Citing provisions in the treaties and the Trade and Intercourse Acts, the council called on Jackson to fulfill his obligation to protect them from encroachment and interference in their domestic affairs. Jackson responded by defending Georgia's claim to sovereignty and offered the Cherokees two choices: Accept Georgia law or move west." (p. 73-74.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)