Dear President-Elect Donald Trump,
Stop attacking our First Amendment.
In the past year, you have Tweeted about limiting Press rights, opening libel laws, discriminating based on religion, criticized those who have exercised their freedom of speech such as protesters (also protected by peaceful assembly laws) and the cast of Hamilton, and even threatened people's citizenship over the court-protected act of flag burning.
This is not acceptable from someone who would be our President, because this is our first and most sacred Right and Freedom. It is what separates us from dictatorships. Threatening to diminish our First Amendment in any way should be seen as nothing less than a personal threat to every citizen of the United States of America.
Get over your ego, and get used to criticism- it comes with the job. Pay attention to how often you exercise your First Amendment, and imagine if your speech and religion were threatened. Do unto others.
Presidency is not a license to make us love you. If someone criticizes you, they probably have a point. You have the choice to be a big crybaby on Twitter like you usually do, or you can look at it as the point where your job as President begins, as chief negotiator, to make our lives better. This is the Land of the Free- if you can't take it, you don't deserve to be our President.
Please prove me wrong- that you can be the best President ever by making us the most free and happy people ever. Help us trust you by being transparent. Otherwise you've set up an Orwellian nightmare. This terrifies me.
Thank you for listening.
Raven Wildchild
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Monday, November 21, 2016
Why We Should Care About Trump's Tweets.
Kellyanne Conway asked reporters, "Why do you care?" when asked about President-elect Trump's tweets scolding the cast of Hamilton. “In other words, who is to say that he can't do that, make a comment, spend five minutes on a tweet and making a comment and still be the president-elect?” she continued.
Trump posted several tweets on the subject.
Donald J. Trump
So here's my explanation as to why we SHOULD care.
1. Trump thought it was important enough to post on a public forum, and Twitter is currently the only news we are receiving directly from Mr. Trump. Asking about his opinions is not only valid, but essential to our understanding of the man who holds power over our future.
2. Trump didn't tweet about his first 100 days, leading us to wonder why he's more concerned about lashing out at people with a different opinion than laying out his agenda.
3. He demanded an apology for rudeness, which is one of the most hypocritical things he could do.
4. Trump exaggerated the offense that wasn't even offensive, and there's a name for this: gaslighting. His behaviors frequently fit the patterns of emotional abuse, and this should not be ignored. This is how domestic abusers talk about the women they batter.
5. It makes us wonder if Trump will complain EVERY time someone uses free speech to an end with which Trump disagrees, or if he may take a harsher tactic once he is in power. This is truly terrifying.
6. He's twisting the truth again. Hamilton's cast tried to be polite, even calling Pence "sir," but it doesn't fit Trump's petulant narrative of how "very rude" the whole world is to him, so he "rebranded" it as "harassment." His spreading of misinformation and closing out the press mirror famous grabs for power, and now nothing the state-owned media of Russia says can be trusted. Freedom of the Press and Speech are essential to an informed democracy.
7. We have been warned about Trump's love for revenge, and though he may candy-coat it with victim-blaming, unleashing his Twitter followers is a classic Trump move to make sure the people he disagrees with truly are harassed. He destroys people financially and socially all the time, and it often starts with a tweet. Will he up the ante as President? Who is next?
8. Has Conway seriously never heard of Orwell's 1984?
Trump posted several tweets on the subject.
Donald J. Trump
The Theater must always be a safe and special place.The cast of Hamilton was very rude last night to a very good man, Mike Pence. Apologize!
He also claimed the cast had "harassed" Pence, though the Veep- elect said he wasn't offended. The cast spoke from the stage, saying “we are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights, sir.”
Conway's defensiveness on the issue is notable. She accused the reporter of "assigning malice and wrongdoing to him where it doesn't exist," and attempted to deflect the question by saying that Trump's 100-day agenda was more important. More on that exchange can be found here.
So here's my explanation as to why we SHOULD care.
1. Trump thought it was important enough to post on a public forum, and Twitter is currently the only news we are receiving directly from Mr. Trump. Asking about his opinions is not only valid, but essential to our understanding of the man who holds power over our future.
2. Trump didn't tweet about his first 100 days, leading us to wonder why he's more concerned about lashing out at people with a different opinion than laying out his agenda.
3. He demanded an apology for rudeness, which is one of the most hypocritical things he could do.
4. Trump exaggerated the offense that wasn't even offensive, and there's a name for this: gaslighting. His behaviors frequently fit the patterns of emotional abuse, and this should not be ignored. This is how domestic abusers talk about the women they batter.
5. It makes us wonder if Trump will complain EVERY time someone uses free speech to an end with which Trump disagrees, or if he may take a harsher tactic once he is in power. This is truly terrifying.
6. He's twisting the truth again. Hamilton's cast tried to be polite, even calling Pence "sir," but it doesn't fit Trump's petulant narrative of how "very rude" the whole world is to him, so he "rebranded" it as "harassment." His spreading of misinformation and closing out the press mirror famous grabs for power, and now nothing the state-owned media of Russia says can be trusted. Freedom of the Press and Speech are essential to an informed democracy.
7. We have been warned about Trump's love for revenge, and though he may candy-coat it with victim-blaming, unleashing his Twitter followers is a classic Trump move to make sure the people he disagrees with truly are harassed. He destroys people financially and socially all the time, and it often starts with a tweet. Will he up the ante as President? Who is next?
8. Has Conway seriously never heard of Orwell's 1984?
Saturday, September 3, 2016
On Creating a Sexually Healthy Society
I am very vocal about my support for the legalization of cannabis, which is the topic of several of my blog posts, but today I'm coming out in support of an even more controversial subject: the legalization of prostitution. Despite my history in the adult industry, this is not something I have ever engaged in, drawing a hard line between my work and sex. I was propositioned many times during my early 20's, and it made me angry. But after the last, particularly infuriating proposition, I had a conversation with a friend that opened my mind to thinking about prositution completely differently.
Today, I see the issues of cannabis prohibition and illegal prostitution as having very similar socio-economic implications. Consumer demand for these products/services has not disappeared despite their legal status, and it is foolish to expect it to do so after millennia of human nature. Thus, the black market abounds.
But it is the impact on culture that most concerns me in regard to prohibition of prostitution. Lest we forget, prositutes were the world's first professionals, and women were powerful where it flourished. It is the morality of patriarchy that condemns the practice, and puts control over sex firmly in the hands of males.
Sexuality is intrinsically bound to our humanity; there is no escape from this truth. Indeed, the need for sexual fulfillment often trumps reasoned thought, and society puts massive amounts of subliminal pressure on the female population to keep the males satisfied. The world is full of Brock Turners and Roger Ailes-types, and we women know that men who aren't satisfied can be dangerous.
It is a great paradox that our culture values females primarily as sexual objects, yet putting a price tag on that value is forbidden. It's no wonder girls develop self-esteem issues, when it's so common for girls to be lured into sexual relationships by males who see them only as a pretty face and a chance to get off.
What if there were an acceptable way to satisfy the physical needs without emotionally abusing another human being? What would it be like if women knew what men were willing to pay for a quick thrill? If a night with a person one didn't intend to love had a standardized value, I bet a lot fewer women would feel pressured to give in to sex when they're not interested. Most women want to consider themselves to be more valuable than a whore, and suddenly dinner and a movie would seem really cheap. If virginity were a commodity, I bet girls would have more incentive to keep it longer, even if they never intended to do sex work.
Much of my Adult industry work revolved around the kink/fetish/BDSM scene. If sex is frequently a taboo topic in our culture, "strange" sex is even more so. In my experience, most people have fantasies beyond the vanilla, but are very afraid of exploring them. Sooner or later they tend to bubble to the surface, and our society gives us no guidance on how to address them in a healthy manner.
The popularity of Fifty Shades of Grey demonstrates how widespread the BDSM fantasy is- it certainly wasn't the quality of writing that made it a bestseller. And then you wonder how many rapes and kidnappings and other horrible things could be prevented if only the perp had a consenting partner to play out their fantasy safely. Given the option of following an S&M club's rules or go to prison over a similar experience, I know which I'd choose.
People who frequent such establishments tend to take physical, mental, emotional, and sexual safety very seriously, as opposed to people who experiment at home. Unfortunately, dungeons are common targets of conservative vitriol, preventing them from offering the community services they truly provide.
It is well established that more sexually oppressed cultures have more problems with sexual violence, disease, and unwanted pregnancy, and that women are more subjugated. We see this clearly in the Middle East, with the daesh openly engaging in human trafficking, rape, predation of children, etc. Contrary to what the GOP likes to believe, these men are not using pornography or strip clubs to fuel their desires; rather, the lack of available outlets encourages them to victimize others.
Here in the U.S., I've been infuriated to hear people say that a girl "asked for it" by wearing something provocative, but the major flaw in this argument is that the man who victimized her is the one who decides whether the outfit is provocative or not. For the Islamic State, going without a veil qualifies. Imagine someone saying, "Look at that slut, you can see her nose." All too real.
Oy, the phrase "plain as the nose on her face" suddenly becomes lewd...
At the other end of the spectrum, my religion Wicca celebrates sexuality, and I enjoy myself greatly at clothing-optional events. Never once have I been mistreated because of my nudity, and on the rare occasion I have experienced leering, other participants step in to make sure I am safe. The culture is built on feminism, and it is the polar opposite of "prude."
I hear a lot of Christians describe sex as "sacred," but I have never seen that in practice. (Sadly, I have heard a lot about Catholic sex abuse scandals; I would hope that's not what they mean.) Wiccans include sexual symbolism in their rituals ("As the athame enters the chalice, so the Lord enters the Lady.") and have rituals designed for the bedroom. Covens often hold workshops on healthy sexuality because it's important and relevant, and it brings the community closer. There's a lot of openness and trust in our culture as a result.
To conclude, I think we could improve gender inequality, rates of violent crime, spread of disease, and unwanted pregnancies by legalizing/regulating prostitution and by providing more sexual education to the public. I've got great ideas for the latter, if someone wants to fund it.
Additional reading: The Ethical Slut
Today, I see the issues of cannabis prohibition and illegal prostitution as having very similar socio-economic implications. Consumer demand for these products/services has not disappeared despite their legal status, and it is foolish to expect it to do so after millennia of human nature. Thus, the black market abounds.
But it is the impact on culture that most concerns me in regard to prohibition of prostitution. Lest we forget, prositutes were the world's first professionals, and women were powerful where it flourished. It is the morality of patriarchy that condemns the practice, and puts control over sex firmly in the hands of males.
Sexuality is intrinsically bound to our humanity; there is no escape from this truth. Indeed, the need for sexual fulfillment often trumps reasoned thought, and society puts massive amounts of subliminal pressure on the female population to keep the males satisfied. The world is full of Brock Turners and Roger Ailes-types, and we women know that men who aren't satisfied can be dangerous.
It is a great paradox that our culture values females primarily as sexual objects, yet putting a price tag on that value is forbidden. It's no wonder girls develop self-esteem issues, when it's so common for girls to be lured into sexual relationships by males who see them only as a pretty face and a chance to get off.
What if there were an acceptable way to satisfy the physical needs without emotionally abusing another human being? What would it be like if women knew what men were willing to pay for a quick thrill? If a night with a person one didn't intend to love had a standardized value, I bet a lot fewer women would feel pressured to give in to sex when they're not interested. Most women want to consider themselves to be more valuable than a whore, and suddenly dinner and a movie would seem really cheap. If virginity were a commodity, I bet girls would have more incentive to keep it longer, even if they never intended to do sex work.
Much of my Adult industry work revolved around the kink/fetish/BDSM scene. If sex is frequently a taboo topic in our culture, "strange" sex is even more so. In my experience, most people have fantasies beyond the vanilla, but are very afraid of exploring them. Sooner or later they tend to bubble to the surface, and our society gives us no guidance on how to address them in a healthy manner.
The popularity of Fifty Shades of Grey demonstrates how widespread the BDSM fantasy is- it certainly wasn't the quality of writing that made it a bestseller. And then you wonder how many rapes and kidnappings and other horrible things could be prevented if only the perp had a consenting partner to play out their fantasy safely. Given the option of following an S&M club's rules or go to prison over a similar experience, I know which I'd choose.
People who frequent such establishments tend to take physical, mental, emotional, and sexual safety very seriously, as opposed to people who experiment at home. Unfortunately, dungeons are common targets of conservative vitriol, preventing them from offering the community services they truly provide.
It is well established that more sexually oppressed cultures have more problems with sexual violence, disease, and unwanted pregnancy, and that women are more subjugated. We see this clearly in the Middle East, with the daesh openly engaging in human trafficking, rape, predation of children, etc. Contrary to what the GOP likes to believe, these men are not using pornography or strip clubs to fuel their desires; rather, the lack of available outlets encourages them to victimize others.
Here in the U.S., I've been infuriated to hear people say that a girl "asked for it" by wearing something provocative, but the major flaw in this argument is that the man who victimized her is the one who decides whether the outfit is provocative or not. For the Islamic State, going without a veil qualifies. Imagine someone saying, "Look at that slut, you can see her nose." All too real.
Oy, the phrase "plain as the nose on her face" suddenly becomes lewd...
At the other end of the spectrum, my religion Wicca celebrates sexuality, and I enjoy myself greatly at clothing-optional events. Never once have I been mistreated because of my nudity, and on the rare occasion I have experienced leering, other participants step in to make sure I am safe. The culture is built on feminism, and it is the polar opposite of "prude."
I hear a lot of Christians describe sex as "sacred," but I have never seen that in practice. (Sadly, I have heard a lot about Catholic sex abuse scandals; I would hope that's not what they mean.) Wiccans include sexual symbolism in their rituals ("As the athame enters the chalice, so the Lord enters the Lady.") and have rituals designed for the bedroom. Covens often hold workshops on healthy sexuality because it's important and relevant, and it brings the community closer. There's a lot of openness and trust in our culture as a result.
To conclude, I think we could improve gender inequality, rates of violent crime, spread of disease, and unwanted pregnancies by legalizing/regulating prostitution and by providing more sexual education to the public. I've got great ideas for the latter, if someone wants to fund it.
Additional reading: The Ethical Slut
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
Book Review: The Charisma Code by Robin Sol Lieberman
I met Robin Sol Lieberman ten years ago when I discovered the Family of Fire, but her reputation had preceded her. I was not disappointed: even here in this magickal world in the desert with drums and dancing and joyous song created by this tribe of amazing people, Robin is a standout figure, passionate and liberated yet present and caring. Her smile is bright and infectious. Indeed, no word describes Robin better than Charismatic.
As impressed as I am by her ability to distill the essence of that elusive charisma and present it in a clear and engaging manner, I had no idea The Charisma Code was the secret puzzle piece I was seeking. Eckhart Tolle's A New Earth left me inspired to be more mindful, and Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People helped me communicate better, but Robin demonstrates a powerfully synergistic approach to interacting with the world on all levels, finding the path of least resistance to effect the greatest change. Robin is friendly and playful as she coaxes the reader to trust in their inherent uniqueness as their Purpose, to give freely of themselves, and forge deeper connections. It left me feeling confident, inspired, and aware.
The Carisma Code is a book I would highly recommend and even give as a gift to many people. It's packed with life-improving advice with the appeal of Oprah Winfrey, and is not intimidating to the light reader. It sparks discussion and connection, making it perfect for book clubs, and the instant practicality of the wisdom is immediately fulfilling. I don't know anyone who wouldn't benefit from some aspect of this multifaceted gem.
As impressed as I am by her ability to distill the essence of that elusive charisma and present it in a clear and engaging manner, I had no idea The Charisma Code was the secret puzzle piece I was seeking. Eckhart Tolle's A New Earth left me inspired to be more mindful, and Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People helped me communicate better, but Robin demonstrates a powerfully synergistic approach to interacting with the world on all levels, finding the path of least resistance to effect the greatest change. Robin is friendly and playful as she coaxes the reader to trust in their inherent uniqueness as their Purpose, to give freely of themselves, and forge deeper connections. It left me feeling confident, inspired, and aware.
The Carisma Code is a book I would highly recommend and even give as a gift to many people. It's packed with life-improving advice with the appeal of Oprah Winfrey, and is not intimidating to the light reader. It sparks discussion and connection, making it perfect for book clubs, and the instant practicality of the wisdom is immediately fulfilling. I don't know anyone who wouldn't benefit from some aspect of this multifaceted gem.
Sunday, August 7, 2016
The White House's Response, and My Refute
On July 21, I sent a letter to the White House. This is the second open letter I've written to President Obama on the subject of cannabis legalization. I sent the first in December of last year, and have not yet received a response. This is highly unusual, and I do feel it has received attention. It can be found here.
The second letter has been by far the most popular blog post I've ever written. It can be found here.
On August 5th I received a response from the White House staff, about 2 weeks after I sent my letter, as is the normal response time. Here is their response:
***Here's my response to them:
Dear White House mail room staff,
Thank you for the timely response to my letter. It is good to hear that the Administration committed to basing policy on science, but it's disappointing to hear such outdated and inaccurate information used to back up its positions.
I have written a line-by line refute of your response on my blog, with links to the data, study, or review whenever possible.
Thank you for proving my point: the Administration needs to update it's information and stance on cannabis prohibition. I await your response.
The second letter has been by far the most popular blog post I've ever written. It can be found here.
On August 5th I received a response from the White House staff, about 2 weeks after I sent my letter, as is the normal response time. Here is their response:
Thank you for writing. The Obama Administration is committed to developing policies based on science and research, and the Federal Government has been funding and reviewing studies to better understand marijuana’s effects on individuals, public health, and safety.
This Administration opposes marijuana legalization, and our policy approach focuses on improving public health and safety through prevention, treatment, support for recovery, and innovative criminal justice strategies to break the cycle of drug use and crime. A considerable body of evidence shows that marijuana use, especially chronic use that begins at a young age, is associated with serious health and social problems.
Studies also reveal that marijuana potency has tripled since 1990, raising serious public health concerns.
At the same time, we share public concerns about ensuring limited Federal enforcement resources are dedicated to pursuing our highest enforcement priorities, such as preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors, preventing the sale of marijuana by criminal enterprises and gangs, preventing violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana, and preventing drugged driving and other adverse public health consequences. We will also closely monitor implementation of marijuana legalization in individual States and prevent the diversion of marijuana to States that have not legalized its use, sale, or distribution. Outside of its highest enforcement priorities, the Federal Government has traditionally relied on State and local agencies to address marijuana activity through enforcement of their own narcotics laws.
Like many people, we are also interested in the potential marijuana components may have in providing relief to individuals diagnosed with certain serious illnesses. That is why we support ongoing research into evaluating what components of the marijuana plant may be used as medicine. To date, though, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine have found smoked marijuana to meet the modern standard for safe or effective medicine for any condition.
Thank you for making your voice heard. You can learn more about the President’s approach to drug control atwww.WhiteHouse.gov/ONDCP.
Sincerely,
The White House
***Here's my response to them:
Dear White House mail room staff,
Thank you for the timely response to my letter. It is good to hear that the Administration committed to basing policy on science, but it's disappointing to hear such outdated and inaccurate information used to back up its positions.
I have written a line-by line refute of your response on my blog, with links to the data, study, or review whenever possible.
Thank you for proving my point: the Administration needs to update it's information and stance on cannabis prohibition. I await your response.
***Here is my refute:
First they claim that a "considerable body of evidence shows that marijuana use, especially chronic use that begins at a young age, is associated with serious health and social problems."
On the subject of chronic use on health, this study tells us it's about as bad as not flossing, but no other health issues were noted. Cannabis is not a cause of mental disorders and has even been shown to improve symptoms in bipolar patients without additional cognitive impairment. Use of cannabis is associated with better outcomes in brain injury patients and lower mortality rates in heart attack victims. It has been shown to slow the spread of cancer and synthetic THC appears to kill leukemia. I have yet to see a recent study that reveals any of the "serious health problems" the Administration referenced, and unlike virtually all other drugs, cannabis overdose is not fatal. Regardless of it's potential benefits, something being unhealthy, addictive, or intoxicating is not grounds for its prohibition, as demonstrated by alcohol and tobacco.
I'd like to point out that legalization has been associated with a decline in teen use, as reported by the CDC, and supported by this study and this study. And this study looked at teenaged twins and found no direct connection between marijuana use and IQ decline. Here's another with similar results. It needs to be noted that alcohol is the gateway drug, not cannabis, as so long has been claimed. Thus we see that harsh prohibition laws do not actually protect teens.
I'd like to point out that legalization has been associated with a decline in teen use, as reported by the CDC, and supported by this study and this study. And this study looked at teenaged twins and found no direct connection between marijuana use and IQ decline. Here's another with similar results. It needs to be noted that alcohol is the gateway drug, not cannabis, as so long has been claimed. Thus we see that harsh prohibition laws do not actually protect teens.
They mention "social issues". This study says work absences decline when cannabis is legalized. It diminishes aggressivenes. The legalization of cannabis is also associated with explosive economic growth, creating jobs in a new billion-dollar industry in Colorado, and amazing tax revenue. Medicare spends less when cannabis is available, too. Ultimately, there is no instance when a black market is preferable to a regulated one. Regulation solves the problems of "preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors, preventing the sale of marijuana by criminal enterprises and gangs, preventing violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation" that the Administration said they are worried about. They want to "stop the cycle of crime?" They need to stop criminalizing it.
The myth that cannabis potency has tripled is based on incomplete information, which is backed up by statements from a July 2004 report from the EMCDDA. Also, the THC content of a plant varies dramatically based on quality of care. There has traditionally been little transparency into government approved growing, until Sen. Elizabeth Warren got involved. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand also exposed that the NIDA monopoly on research cannabis production is unwarranted. Controlling the only available research material severely limits sample diversity, and any good scientist knows that skews results. In 2011 I wrote to Harry Reid about labs that reported receiving very low quality test samples from the NIDA, containing a shredded mix of the entire plant rather than cured flowers, and will look again for those references.
The Administration expressed concern about drugged driving, but as we know from alcohol and allergy medicine, inebriative qualities are not grounds for prohibition of a substance. Additionally, the U.S. National Roadside Survey found that cannabis was not linked to higher crash risks, compared to how even legal levels of alcohol significantly increase danger. Supporting the findings of the USNRS, this review found that risk associated with cannabis was previously overstated.
In conclusion, the stale arguments in favor of prohibition are quickly dismantled when looking at the studies and data published in the last 6 months. There is no legitimate reason for cannabis to be illegal, prohibition does not protect the people from anything, black markets fuel crime and teen use, old government statistics are inaccurate, and the risks and effects don't seem nearly as negative as once claimed.
It's time for the Administration to update their information. Prohibition has failed, and legalization is a wild success in Colorado, etc. Fix the injustice, accept the $28 Billion tax the people actually want to pay, and let's deal with this as a health issue instead of a criminal one.
In conclusion, the stale arguments in favor of prohibition are quickly dismantled when looking at the studies and data published in the last 6 months. There is no legitimate reason for cannabis to be illegal, prohibition does not protect the people from anything, black markets fuel crime and teen use, old government statistics are inaccurate, and the risks and effects don't seem nearly as negative as once claimed.
It's time for the Administration to update their information. Prohibition has failed, and legalization is a wild success in Colorado, etc. Fix the injustice, accept the $28 Billion tax the people actually want to pay, and let's deal with this as a health issue instead of a criminal one.
Sunday, July 24, 2016
I can't believe I wrote a Patriotic Rap... :p
Lately I've been inspired to write rap lyrics, which is a surprise to me as much as you. Please forgive me if it sucks, but I really feel this message, and I think our culture needs some good mojo right now.
Born in America
Land of Opportunity
Grew up fairly comfortable
Was taught that we were free
But things came crashing down
All around, all so suddenly
September eleventh
Our day of tragedy
So we overreacted
Passed the Patriot Act
And we lost a bunch of freedoms
And protections like that
Economic recession
Shattering our dreams
Costing us our homes
And our dignities
And all the while
Wall Street laughs
Toasting their glasses
Above the gathered mass
They think that we are weak
Indentured servantry
But the People hold the power
In this country
Chorus:
If we want to win
We have to stand together
If you want peace
You've got to love your neighbor
'Cause America's strength
Is diversity
Every stripe is needed
In the Land of the Free
We're an exceptional country
The U-S-of-A
But that really isn't meant
In a superior way
Immigrants traveled
Across the seas
To make a patchwork of cultures
And ethnicities
It's an experimental
Melting pot
I know that it's not perfect
But we give what we've got
And of all the places
I could be
I'm grateful I was born
In a democracy
Life has never been easy
It's never been fair
But we can make it better
When we show that we care
For although we are
As different as could be
What unites us all
Is our Humanity
Chorus
The world's a scary place
But that's nothing new
Don't believe in all those fears
It makes them stronger than you
So take a tip from Yoda
When you're feeling angry
'Cause if it turns to hate
Well, we know where that leads
Walling off the world
Isn't the answer
Suffering spreads
Just like a cancer
We gotta be the change
That we wish to see
Sure it's cliche
But I'm speaking truthfully
Rise above with your love
We're all in this together
The pointing of fingers
Causes ties to be severed
One thing we must remember
If we want to stay free
We have to let our Brothers
Be themselves, naturally
Chorus
Born in America
Land of Opportunity
Grew up fairly comfortable
Was taught that we were free
But things came crashing down
All around, all so suddenly
September eleventh
Our day of tragedy
So we overreacted
Passed the Patriot Act
And we lost a bunch of freedoms
And protections like that
Economic recession
Shattering our dreams
Costing us our homes
And our dignities
And all the while
Wall Street laughs
Toasting their glasses
Above the gathered mass
They think that we are weak
Indentured servantry
But the People hold the power
In this country
Chorus:
If we want to win
We have to stand together
If you want peace
You've got to love your neighbor
'Cause America's strength
Is diversity
Every stripe is needed
In the Land of the Free
We're an exceptional country
The U-S-of-A
But that really isn't meant
In a superior way
Immigrants traveled
Across the seas
To make a patchwork of cultures
And ethnicities
It's an experimental
Melting pot
I know that it's not perfect
But we give what we've got
And of all the places
I could be
I'm grateful I was born
In a democracy
Life has never been easy
It's never been fair
But we can make it better
When we show that we care
For although we are
As different as could be
What unites us all
Is our Humanity
Chorus
The world's a scary place
But that's nothing new
Don't believe in all those fears
It makes them stronger than you
So take a tip from Yoda
When you're feeling angry
'Cause if it turns to hate
Well, we know where that leads
Walling off the world
Isn't the answer
Suffering spreads
Just like a cancer
We gotta be the change
That we wish to see
Sure it's cliche
But I'm speaking truthfully
Rise above with your love
We're all in this together
The pointing of fingers
Causes ties to be severed
One thing we must remember
If we want to stay free
We have to let our Brothers
Be themselves, naturally
Chorus
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Letter on DEA to President Obama
Dear Mr. President Obama,
As you are aware, the American people are waiting to hear the DEA's decision on the scheduling of cannabis (marijuana), which was supposed to be released in June. Honestly, I don't trust the DEA to rule in the country's best interest. I'm not a legal scholar, but I know that laws regarding this plant are deliberately complex.
As I understand it, plants are not legally considered medicine, even when the plant has traditionally been used medicinally and components are isolated for modern medicine, as in the case of white willow (asprin) and foxglove (digitalis is used in heart medicine). Since these plants are not considered to have medicinal value, this sets the precedent that cannabis will not be given that status. But neither do we have foxglove eradication program making sure only those with prescriptions get their digitalis (after all, the plant can be poisonous in wrong dosage). People take herbs at their own risk.
There was even a time when doctors were forbidden from admitting that herbs had any effect medically, because legally they have no medicinal value. I know a nurse practitioner who recently reversed his stance on natural remedies, once he saw the effect of peppermint oil firsthand. The asthmatic discovered he didn't need his inhaler when the oil was applied to his chest, and this flew in the face of everything he learned in medical school.
It's really difficult to trust the FDA and the DEA to not be in the pocket of Big Pharma. From here, it seems policy is more firmly shaped by pharmaceutical profits than good public policy. We see Big Pharma's fingerprints all over the opioid epidemic, and the law makes it so hard to study cannabis that it's suspicious. If cannabis sativa (sativa means "useful" in Latin) is really so dangerous as the propaganda has been telling us for so many decades, then science would confirm this. The reality is, we've been lied to, and science is proving that.
Why put so much legislation in place to keep us in the dark? Who benefits so much from prohibition? Not the American people- it creates black markets, overpopulated prisons, waste of tax revenue, and a divide with law enforcement. Adults are trusted to be responsible with alcohol, which has many known negative attributes. We've seen positive effects everywhere cannabis has been legalized, so it doesn't seem like there is any good reason for it to be illegal.
Prohibition does nothing for the good of the People, but certain special interest groups make money because of it. Doesn't this fit John Locke's definition of Tyranny, against which our Founding Fathers told us to be ever vigilant?
I have a sinking feeling that when the DEA reveals its decision, it's going to preserve the status quo as much as possible, while creating avenues for Big Pharma to cash in. So I'm asking you to please use your influence to right the injustice inherent in prohibition. We're supposed to be free to persue our happiness, and for some of us, cannabis helps us on our way. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Raven Wildchild
As you are aware, the American people are waiting to hear the DEA's decision on the scheduling of cannabis (marijuana), which was supposed to be released in June. Honestly, I don't trust the DEA to rule in the country's best interest. I'm not a legal scholar, but I know that laws regarding this plant are deliberately complex.
As I understand it, plants are not legally considered medicine, even when the plant has traditionally been used medicinally and components are isolated for modern medicine, as in the case of white willow (asprin) and foxglove (digitalis is used in heart medicine). Since these plants are not considered to have medicinal value, this sets the precedent that cannabis will not be given that status. But neither do we have foxglove eradication program making sure only those with prescriptions get their digitalis (after all, the plant can be poisonous in wrong dosage). People take herbs at their own risk.
There was even a time when doctors were forbidden from admitting that herbs had any effect medically, because legally they have no medicinal value. I know a nurse practitioner who recently reversed his stance on natural remedies, once he saw the effect of peppermint oil firsthand. The asthmatic discovered he didn't need his inhaler when the oil was applied to his chest, and this flew in the face of everything he learned in medical school.
It's really difficult to trust the FDA and the DEA to not be in the pocket of Big Pharma. From here, it seems policy is more firmly shaped by pharmaceutical profits than good public policy. We see Big Pharma's fingerprints all over the opioid epidemic, and the law makes it so hard to study cannabis that it's suspicious. If cannabis sativa (sativa means "useful" in Latin) is really so dangerous as the propaganda has been telling us for so many decades, then science would confirm this. The reality is, we've been lied to, and science is proving that.
Why put so much legislation in place to keep us in the dark? Who benefits so much from prohibition? Not the American people- it creates black markets, overpopulated prisons, waste of tax revenue, and a divide with law enforcement. Adults are trusted to be responsible with alcohol, which has many known negative attributes. We've seen positive effects everywhere cannabis has been legalized, so it doesn't seem like there is any good reason for it to be illegal.
Prohibition does nothing for the good of the People, but certain special interest groups make money because of it. Doesn't this fit John Locke's definition of Tyranny, against which our Founding Fathers told us to be ever vigilant?
I have a sinking feeling that when the DEA reveals its decision, it's going to preserve the status quo as much as possible, while creating avenues for Big Pharma to cash in. So I'm asking you to please use your influence to right the injustice inherent in prohibition. We're supposed to be free to persue our happiness, and for some of us, cannabis helps us on our way. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Raven Wildchild
Monday, July 4, 2016
American Exceptionalism: We are the Wildcard
A lot of people, including President Obama, are uncomfortable with the term "American Exceptionalism," and I can't blame them: the term sounds like we're saying that the U.S. is better than the rest of the world. But the meaning is closer to the concept of "the exception to the rule," though I don't mean exempt from following rules. It means our country's formation was unique in the history of the world.
Never before has there been a country created with a population so widely diverse as the United States, with no common heritage or culture or religion dictating the course of our fate. We are the wildcard, with the potential to rise above using the combined wisdom of the world, or to fall flat believing it doesn't apply to us.
Our diversity is a great strength, helping to make us a world leader in innovation, and as the Land of Opportunity, we understand that innovation often comes from the least expected places. In many cases, or ancestors came to this land to make a better life, because their homelands imposed restrictions that limited potential. We are defended from the world's most adventurous spirits, and those strong enough to escape oppression. This country is built on their optimism and highest ideals.
Therefore, it is important for the U.S. to honor immigrants as part of the reason America is great, to look to the histories of other nations and learn from their mistakes, to take responsibility for the role we play in the world, and to make sure all our citizens have the opportunity to reach their highest potential, because it helps us be stronger.
Times are hard now, but America is still great because we aren't held back by centuries'-old patterns; we are built on creating better futures.
Never before has there been a country created with a population so widely diverse as the United States, with no common heritage or culture or religion dictating the course of our fate. We are the wildcard, with the potential to rise above using the combined wisdom of the world, or to fall flat believing it doesn't apply to us.
Our diversity is a great strength, helping to make us a world leader in innovation, and as the Land of Opportunity, we understand that innovation often comes from the least expected places. In many cases, or ancestors came to this land to make a better life, because their homelands imposed restrictions that limited potential. We are defended from the world's most adventurous spirits, and those strong enough to escape oppression. This country is built on their optimism and highest ideals.
Therefore, it is important for the U.S. to honor immigrants as part of the reason America is great, to look to the histories of other nations and learn from their mistakes, to take responsibility for the role we play in the world, and to make sure all our citizens have the opportunity to reach their highest potential, because it helps us be stronger.
Times are hard now, but America is still great because we aren't held back by centuries'-old patterns; we are built on creating better futures.
Monday, May 30, 2016
On Balancing Diverse Opinions
http://mobile.nytimes6/05/29/opinion/sunday/the-liberal-blind-spot.html
I was reading this article called "The Liberal Blind Spot" regarding how universities have lately been censoring conservative speakers and, while I agree that we shouldn't censor opinions that differ from our own, I feel the author misunderstands some of the reasons there is that knee-jerk reaction. He suggests that, like Islamophobia is more common among those who have never met a Muslim, perhaps bias against Evangelicals is due to not having Evangelical friends. Obviously this person has never been harassed to convert to Christianity. As a Wiccan, I've experienced this many, many times over the last 15 years, with some people becoming quite aggressive about it. I may be minding my own business, silently reading tarot cards or wearing a pentacle necklace that gets their attention.
Now, I am fascinated by religion and happen to be fairly knowledgeable about Christianity- in fact, more knowledgeable than the last person who wouldn't leave me alone. He admitted he was recently "born again" and had only read part of Genesis out of the whole Bible, and when I tried to engage him in an intellectual conversation with a few poignant questions, he responded that his pastor would know all the answers and I was wrong because only the Christian God was real and good. I decided to end the conversation because it was like trying to debate with Donald Trump- facts didn't matter to him. But he continued to press the issue, aggressively telling me about Satan in child-like terms. When this is a typical experience, it makes sense that people whom the Church has been known to demonize- pagans, LGBTQ folk, and other outsiders- might be concerned about having a conservative speaker on their college campus. It is an awkward situation when a person feels that God wants them to impose their opinions on others, and I have yet to find a graceful method of diffusing those situations.
So the question becomes, how do we strike a balance between allowing all opinions to be heard while making sure no one is unfairly treated? It has been an ongoing process for me to learn how to listen, and I work hard on it, but it's extremely difficult to maintain that presence of mind when the other party seems unwilling to reciprocate. How do we engage those who do not wish to engage us? And what do you do when a core belief of another person is to try and change or subvert an integral part of your being? Ironically, it was Jesus who told us to "Turn the other cheek" when slapped in the face, but who wants to get slapped in the first place?
I was reading this article called "The Liberal Blind Spot" regarding how universities have lately been censoring conservative speakers and, while I agree that we shouldn't censor opinions that differ from our own, I feel the author misunderstands some of the reasons there is that knee-jerk reaction. He suggests that, like Islamophobia is more common among those who have never met a Muslim, perhaps bias against Evangelicals is due to not having Evangelical friends. Obviously this person has never been harassed to convert to Christianity. As a Wiccan, I've experienced this many, many times over the last 15 years, with some people becoming quite aggressive about it. I may be minding my own business, silently reading tarot cards or wearing a pentacle necklace that gets their attention.
Now, I am fascinated by religion and happen to be fairly knowledgeable about Christianity- in fact, more knowledgeable than the last person who wouldn't leave me alone. He admitted he was recently "born again" and had only read part of Genesis out of the whole Bible, and when I tried to engage him in an intellectual conversation with a few poignant questions, he responded that his pastor would know all the answers and I was wrong because only the Christian God was real and good. I decided to end the conversation because it was like trying to debate with Donald Trump- facts didn't matter to him. But he continued to press the issue, aggressively telling me about Satan in child-like terms. When this is a typical experience, it makes sense that people whom the Church has been known to demonize- pagans, LGBTQ folk, and other outsiders- might be concerned about having a conservative speaker on their college campus. It is an awkward situation when a person feels that God wants them to impose their opinions on others, and I have yet to find a graceful method of diffusing those situations.
So the question becomes, how do we strike a balance between allowing all opinions to be heard while making sure no one is unfairly treated? It has been an ongoing process for me to learn how to listen, and I work hard on it, but it's extremely difficult to maintain that presence of mind when the other party seems unwilling to reciprocate. How do we engage those who do not wish to engage us? And what do you do when a core belief of another person is to try and change or subvert an integral part of your being? Ironically, it was Jesus who told us to "Turn the other cheek" when slapped in the face, but who wants to get slapped in the first place?
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
On Trump's tax returns
Donald Trump loves to boast about how he made over $500 million last year, but also that he pays as little as possible in taxes. While he refuses to release his tax returns, old returns available to the public show that he paid $0 in taxes those years. We can assume he continues the same tactics and still pays no taxes. This should be a very concerning thing to those of us who struggle to get by and still pay a good chunk of our hard-earned paychecks to Uncle Sam.
By my estimation, Trump should be paying about $175 million in taxes for last year, without considering any deductions of which he takes advantage. At least, that's what an average person who suddenly won a $500 million lotto would be expected to pay. That's what our tax system says is fair.
But as the favorite pastime of the American wealthy, tax evasion means that the huge financial burden of running the country falls on the working class. Why is it OK for us to struggle to make ends meet while people like him get a free ride? That's not fair play, but the Donald makes it clear he doesn't believe the rules apply to him.
Trump benefits from the taxes WE pay- our nation's infrastructure can't be supported without those taxes, and he looks down on the rest of us as "stupid" for paying those taxes. America can't be great without income, and his "great business mind" knows this. But his "very good brain" only thinks about helping his own business interests and not the greater economic state, which is ironic- he can't make money of people who don't have any. The mindset he espouses is directly responsible for the recession of which we're clawing our way out (and from which he personally benefitted, i.e., he made money when you lost your home). But rather than using his "very good brain" to solve the economic crisis for the good of the many, to recognize that his contribution to the shared struggle of America could be far more impactful than 1,000 people with my wages, he still strives to leave us high and dry when the tax collector calls for contributions to the true Greatness of America.
It shocks me that so many are willing to support a man who so gleefully rapes our economic system, who openly says he will change or ignore any rules he doesn't like... How can we trust such a man to be a wise and benevolent leader? To put all our fates in those money-grubbing hands and expect him to help the people on whose backs he stands? This is a very dangerous possibility, and we would be fools to allow it.
By my estimation, Trump should be paying about $175 million in taxes for last year, without considering any deductions of which he takes advantage. At least, that's what an average person who suddenly won a $500 million lotto would be expected to pay. That's what our tax system says is fair.
But as the favorite pastime of the American wealthy, tax evasion means that the huge financial burden of running the country falls on the working class. Why is it OK for us to struggle to make ends meet while people like him get a free ride? That's not fair play, but the Donald makes it clear he doesn't believe the rules apply to him.
Trump benefits from the taxes WE pay- our nation's infrastructure can't be supported without those taxes, and he looks down on the rest of us as "stupid" for paying those taxes. America can't be great without income, and his "great business mind" knows this. But his "very good brain" only thinks about helping his own business interests and not the greater economic state, which is ironic- he can't make money of people who don't have any. The mindset he espouses is directly responsible for the recession of which we're clawing our way out (and from which he personally benefitted, i.e., he made money when you lost your home). But rather than using his "very good brain" to solve the economic crisis for the good of the many, to recognize that his contribution to the shared struggle of America could be far more impactful than 1,000 people with my wages, he still strives to leave us high and dry when the tax collector calls for contributions to the true Greatness of America.
It shocks me that so many are willing to support a man who so gleefully rapes our economic system, who openly says he will change or ignore any rules he doesn't like... How can we trust such a man to be a wise and benevolent leader? To put all our fates in those money-grubbing hands and expect him to help the people on whose backs he stands? This is a very dangerous possibility, and we would be fools to allow it.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
On the Bathroom Laws of North Carolina
I've been watching the controversy regarding North Carolina's "bathroom laws" with great interest, because they affect several people close to me. The jist of the law is that people have to use the bathroom corresponding with the gender assigned at birth, and that cities cannot create their own laws protecting LGBTQIA people, nor can public buildings provide gender neutral bathrooms. Supporters of the law claim it is to protect women from predators dressing in drag to access women's restrooms. This urban legend not only has no basis in reality, but sexual predation is still illegal in localities where trans rights are protected.
Ted Cruz supports the law, saying that "trans" is what happens if Donald Trump dresses as Hillary Clinton. But this shows a massive amount of ignorance about the people who this law affects and even puts at risk.
Transvestites are indeed people who dress in the clothing of the opposite sex, but they rarely go out in public dressed as such, except to places accepting of this behavior. There is a lot of stigma associated with the practice, and most transvestites are not out of the closet.
Transgendered people actively take hormones or otherwise alter their bodies to become more like the opposite sex. The younger they start the hormore therapy and the longer they use it, the more they resemble the opposite sex. These are the people who are most damagingly affected by the bathroom law. You may not realize that an individual is transgendered until they are forced to choose: break the law and us the bathroom that feels right, or reveal their private medical history and risk getting beat up by bigots (which happens all too frequently). These individuals are already in a dangerous position, just because many people consider being trans perverse or immoral. I remember what happened to Matthew Shepherd; crimes against LGBTQIA people happen all too often.
Intersex ndividuals are born with gender ambiguity. I was a child when I first heard about such a thing, on some talk show where a boy about my age and his mother were discussing the choices the doctors had made at his birth. He had been born with a tiny penis and yo-yo testicles, and the doctors thought he was a deformed girl and performed surgery to make his genitals look female. He always identified as male, though, and when puberty began, it was clear he was genetically male. Today, doctors don't make those decisions at birth, and allow the child to make the choice themselves at puberty, or even postpone puberty until the child makes a firm decision. As these persons were not assigned a gender at birth, do they have the right to use a bathroom at all in North Carolina?
The governor has decried protests of the law as "political theater," and completely ignores the plight of those it affects. It causes undue hardship on this specific group of people and refuses them protection. It perpetuates prejudice by lumping trans people in the same category as sexual predators. The law needs to be repealed immediately, as legislation has already been put forth, or declared unconstitutional. May it be so.
Ted Cruz supports the law, saying that "trans" is what happens if Donald Trump dresses as Hillary Clinton. But this shows a massive amount of ignorance about the people who this law affects and even puts at risk.
Transvestites are indeed people who dress in the clothing of the opposite sex, but they rarely go out in public dressed as such, except to places accepting of this behavior. There is a lot of stigma associated with the practice, and most transvestites are not out of the closet.
Transgendered people actively take hormones or otherwise alter their bodies to become more like the opposite sex. The younger they start the hormore therapy and the longer they use it, the more they resemble the opposite sex. These are the people who are most damagingly affected by the bathroom law. You may not realize that an individual is transgendered until they are forced to choose: break the law and us the bathroom that feels right, or reveal their private medical history and risk getting beat up by bigots (which happens all too frequently). These individuals are already in a dangerous position, just because many people consider being trans perverse or immoral. I remember what happened to Matthew Shepherd; crimes against LGBTQIA people happen all too often.
Intersex ndividuals are born with gender ambiguity. I was a child when I first heard about such a thing, on some talk show where a boy about my age and his mother were discussing the choices the doctors had made at his birth. He had been born with a tiny penis and yo-yo testicles, and the doctors thought he was a deformed girl and performed surgery to make his genitals look female. He always identified as male, though, and when puberty began, it was clear he was genetically male. Today, doctors don't make those decisions at birth, and allow the child to make the choice themselves at puberty, or even postpone puberty until the child makes a firm decision. As these persons were not assigned a gender at birth, do they have the right to use a bathroom at all in North Carolina?
The governor has decried protests of the law as "political theater," and completely ignores the plight of those it affects. It causes undue hardship on this specific group of people and refuses them protection. It perpetuates prejudice by lumping trans people in the same category as sexual predators. The law needs to be repealed immediately, as legislation has already been put forth, or declared unconstitutional. May it be so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)