Worried Whispers

Published October 21, 2024 by Nan Mykel

I’ve been hesitant to voice my concerns from a superstitious fear that voicing them might cause them, but time is running out. Will there be more violence if Trump wins or loses? Not a pretty picture.

Are there two different populations in Trump’s camp: both the wealthy and the frustrated foot soldiers who follow his lead to “stand down” or “up?” It appears to me that the wealthy may be weaponizing the white men on the bottom. I viewed many of the FBI’s WANTED photos, and feel some compassion for those who seemed to be feeling good about their actions. I think of the two populations as the “Hoodwinks” and the Wealthiest.

And I can imagine some men voting against Kamala as a result of concern about being usurped by women and their (our) movement, which leads me to my very unpopular stance that women should de-sexualize themselves if they (we) want to be viewed as equal humans. When I say “de-sexualize” I’m referring to the widespread effort to manipulate men by excessive “sexiness.” Some rapists believe females are trying to control them by making starving men hungrier (to coin a phrase). As a result of my perspective, I would like both men and women to feel better about themselves as adequate humans and strive to be more civilized.

And yes, the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling in 2010 may be at the root of it all.

________________________

I STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY

US President George Bush said he has signed into law a bill requiring the US Department of State to monitor global anti-Semitism and annually rate countries on their treatment of Jews.

The state’s Jewish population is the third largest in the world after Israel and New York.

The state department had opposed the legislation, saying it was unnecessary as the department already compiles such information in its annual reports on human rights and religious freedom.

___________________

JOSH PAUL’S RESIGNATION…failed to get enough coverage in my opinion.

“My name is Josh Paul. I resigned from my position as a director in the US State Department’s Bureau of Political Military Affairs last October in opposition to
America’s policy of providing lethal arms to Israel in the context of its current war on Gaza….I believe to the core of my soul that the response Israel is taking , and with it the American support both for that response and for the status quo of the occupation, will only lead to more and deeper suffering for both the Israeli and the Palestinian people-and is not in the long term American interest. This Administration’s response-and much of Congress’ as well-is an impulsive reaction built on confirmation bias, political convenience, intellectual bankruptcy, and bureaucratic inertia.” [Note: He is not the lead guitarist of the same name] –Aljazeera

__________________

OLD IS NOT THE PROBLEM?

Published March 11, 2024 by Nan Mykel

What’s wrong with women that we’re so easily abused and misused? It may be because we’re physically weaker than men, pushovers, literally. Is our empathy so easy to use against us? I hear “lady like” more often than “gentleman like.” Does the role of nurturer/caretaker overshadow other areas of life? What was behind the difficulty in letting us vote? Why were white women allowed to vote before women of color? What is the source of prejudice? Surely not fear. Allah (swt) says in the Quran, “O believers treat women with kindness even if you dislike them.”!! [That doesn’t exactly put women on a par with men!] In addition/as a result, many women have bought into seeing themselves as less.

According to Wikipedia, Males on average are more assertive and have higher self-esteem. Females were on average higher than males in extroversion, anxiety, trust, and, especially, tender-mindedness (e.g., nurturance).

After reflecting for most of today and reading on this topic (suffrage, Islam’s treatment of women, abortions outlawed in much of U.S., and FGM–female genital mutilation–in other countries–I was interested to see on a post from O.U. what appeared to be a woman’s view of her Muslim life: “Thus, in the Islamic tradition, a woman has an independent identity. She is a responsible being in her own right and carries the burden of her moral and spiritual obligations. Women have as much right to education as men do.” Why do I feel like a well-behaved Muslim woman wrote that, defensively?

I sought an additional version from the International Islamic University Malaysia https://www.iium.edu.my› articles: “What is a woman’s role in Islam? Men are providers for women and in exchange for support, women should be obedient and serve their husbands. They should keep their virginity and after marriage, loyalty, chastity and complete dedication to their husbands are prerequisite for securing maintenance. Women are seen as weak and as easily overpowered by men. (“Women in the Quran and the Sunnah – IIUM”)

During this long afternoon it occurs to me that the unspoken sentiment behind the complaints that “Biden’s too old” really is that no one’s willing to say it out loud without seeming prejudiced: Being too old means that he might die in office, leaving a female of color in his place. Biden can’t say it, nor can Democrats, without being seen as racist and/or misogynist. So everyone is quiet about it–at least in the print I saw (or didn’t see), and the [imagined?] concern is not being addressed. Republicans are also avoiding the “prejudiced” label, at least in their public proclamations. It almost makes me wish she’d bow out, but don’t tell her I said that! [“Any vote not cast for Biden is a vote for Trump.”]

Google describes Kamala Harris, the current U.S. Vice President under Joe Biden, as the first woman, second bi-racial, (Charles Curtis, a member of the Caw Nation served under Hoover), and the first South Asian American vice president. (She was born in the United States!} Her mother was a Tamil Brahmin, part of a “privileged elite” in Hinduism’s ancient caste hierarchy, but moved from India to the United States and received her PhD. at Berkeley in 1964. Now deceased, her mother became a biomedical scientist. Her father is Donald Jasper Harris (born August 23, 1938), a Jamaican-American economist and professor emeritus at Stanford University. Her parents divorced in 1971, after eight years.

How to deal with this problem? P.S. I’m 88+, so Biden’s just a kid to me.

What’s a Person to Do?

Published December 20, 2023 by Nan Mykel

SOMETIMES IT SEEMS LIKE THE LOAD is too huge to bear. Sometimes I get washed off my feet by the weight of it all. At such times a list of concrete goals strikes me as handy. A random list of worthy causes I try to remember, in no special order, includes: OOPS–Sorry. I didn’t get beyond the first cause today: Women:

1870 — African-Americans may vote now, but women may not.

1918 — Doctors in New York are permitted to advise their married patients about birth control for health purposes. My mother was six years old.

August 18, 1920 – Women allowed to vote – Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote. Only a smidge over a hundred years ago. Victory took decades of agitation and protest. I’ve experienced that fact like a fairy tale, not fully realizing that it occurred only fifteen years before I was born. My mother was eight years old when women were “given” the right to vote. (African Americans were granted that right in 1870.)

1936 — Judicial approval of medicinal use of birth control is established. I am one year old.

1964 — The Civil Rights Act passes, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.

1965 — In Griswold v Connecticut, the Supreme Court overturns one of the last state laws prohibiting the prescription or use of contraceptives by married couples.

1971 — In Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court outlaws the practice of private employers refusing to hire women with pre-school children.

1972 — Title IX of the Education Amendments prohibits sex discrimination in all aspects of education programs that receive federal support.

1972 — In Eisenstadt v. Baird, the Supreme Court rules that the right to privacy encompasses an unmarried person’s right to use contraceptives.

1973 — With its Roe v. Wade decision, the U.S. Supreme Court declares that the Constitution protects women’s right to terminate an early pregnancy, thus making abortion legal in the U.S.

1994 — Congress adopts the Gender Equity in Education Act to train teachers in gender equity, promote math and science learning by girls, counsel pregnant teens, and prevent sexual harassment.

1994 — The Violence Against Women Act funds services for victims of rape and domestic violence, allows women to seek civil rights remedies for gender-related crimes, provides training to increase police and court officials’ sensitivity and a national 24-hour hotline for battered women.

2013 — Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. The new bill extends coverage to women of Native American tribal lands who are attacked by non-tribal residents, as well as lesbians and immigrants.

2017 — A worldwide protest called The Women’s March happens the day following Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration. It was the largest single-day protest in U.S. history with an estimated 4 million participating in local marches across the nation. The organizers’ goal for the march was “send a bold message to our new administration on their first day in office, and to the world that women’s rights are human rights.”

2022 — The Supreme Court rules that the constitution does not confer any right to abortion, thus overruling both Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) and setting off waves of protests across the U.S.

Dates selected partially from History of Women’s Rights in America (MARCH 16, 2017)

___________________

TODAY I SAW…

Published August 18, 2023 by Nan Mykel

…Two fannies hanging out from under short short shorts.

I am told short shorts and neckless tops are all the rage, a “statement” about women being humans, or some such. I hope those women will not be among those complaining of being treated like sex objects by men. We passed through the stage of women being “dumb blondes,” didn’t we? Do we see our worth by revealing our bodies instead of our personhood or have we re-defined our personhood by focusing on our bodies in contrast to our brains? Have we given up on our brains being equal?

Are women really so jealous of men being able to go without shirts on hot days? A reading on evolution will demonstrate the difference in sexual underpinnings between female and male. Ignoring the difference in drives strikes me as naive.

Bikinis at the beach in no way shouts “personhood” to me, but a wanting to please male viewers, and not as an equal human being. In writing this I wish I were not so old because such a stand is so easily attributed to being a “fuddy duddy.” I just hope that these short short short and neckless tops women won’t complain loudly of being seen as sex objects. Of course, they may have just given up on being seen as equals, due in part to current political oppression and behavior of their dingbat political sisters.

I’m not under the impression that the new female CEO’s wear enticing garments to their jobs environments.

Please feel free to argue with me in “comments”.

Reblog: In Case You Missed This…

Published September 8, 2021 by Nan Mykel

Dana Milbank is a regular opinion writer for The Washington Post. As a native Texan, who still has strong emotional ties to the state, I found his analysis to be deeply upsetting. Since the Supreme Court’s decision not to overturn the Texas abortion ban, I can no longer buy anything from Texas, including Tito’s, my favorite vodka. When the anti-vaxxers show up at school board meetings proclaiming “My body, my choice,” I wonder why they don’t feel the same about women’s reproductive rights.

Milbank wrote:

Texas this week showed us what a post-democracy America would look like. Thanks to a series of actions by the Texas legislature and governor, we now see exactly what the Trumpified Republican Party wants: to take us to an America where women cannot get abortions, even in cases of rape and incest; an America where almost everybody can openly carry a gun in public, without license, without permit, without safety training and without fingerprinting; and an America where law-abiding Black and Latino citizens are disproportionately denied the right to vote. This is where Texas and other red states are going, or have already gone. It is where the rest of America will go, unless those targeted by these new laws — women, people of color and all small “d” democrats — rise up. 

On Wednesday, a Texas law went into effect that bans abortions later than six weeks, after the Supreme Court let pass a request to block the statute. Because 85 to 90 percent of women get abortions after six weeks, it amounts to a near-total ban. Already on the books in Texas is a “trigger” law that automatically bans all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest, if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. At least 10 other states have done likewise.

 Also Wednesday, a new law went into effect in Texas, over the objections of law enforcement, allowing all Texans otherwise allowed to own guns to carry them in public, without a license and without training. Now, 20 states have blessed such “permitless carry.” 

And on Tuesday, the Texas legislature passed the final version of the Republican voting bill that bans drive-through and 24-hour voting, both used disproportionately by voters of color; imposes new limits on voting by mail, blocks election officials from distributing mail-ballot applications unless specifically requested; gives partisan poll watchers more leeway to influence vote counting; and places new rules and paperwork requirements that deter people from helping others to vote or to register. At least 17 states have adopted similar restrictions.   

All three of these actions are deeply antidemocratic. Texans overwhelmingly object to permitless carry. Fully 57 percent of Texas voters oppose such a law and only 36 percent support it, according to a June poll by the University of Texas and the Texas Tribune. The partnership’s April poll found that, by 46 percent to 20 percent, Texans want stricter gun laws — and support for tougher laws is 54 percent among women, 55 percent among Latinos and 65 percent among Black voters. 

Texans also oppose banning all abortions if Roe is overturned, with 53 percent against a ban and 37 percent for one. Women oppose the ban, 58 percent to 33 percent. A narrow plurality (46 percent to 44 percent) oppose the six-week ban, too.

 Furthermore, pluralities of Texans opposed the ban on drive-through voting and restrictions on early voting hours. The drive-through ban was particularly objectionable to Black voters (52 percent opposed to 30 percent in the April poll) and Latino voters (44 percent to 36 percent), as were the limits on early voting hours, opposed 52 percent to 28 percent among Black voters and 46 percent to 31 percent among Latino voters.

 And that’s the whole point of such voter-suppression laws. Texas became a “majority minority” state more than 15 years ago — and the country as a whole will follow in about two decades. But White voters still dominate the electorate. Latinos are about 40 percent of the Texas population, but only 20 to 25 percent of the electorate. Texas legislators aren’t answering to the people but rather to the White, male voters that put the Republicans in power. The new voting law, by suppressing non-White votes, aims to keep White voters dominant. As demographics turn more and more against Republicans in Texas, their antidemocratic actions will only get worse. 

Bad things happen when leaders don’t reflect the will of the people. This is happening already in Texas and some other red states. It will be happening more nationally if Republicans get their way.   

One Man’s View on Kamala

Published February 2, 2021 by Nan Mykel

Keith Wilson writes:

The swearing in of Joe Biden as the 46th president is a huge deal. We can return to more normalcy in governance as he tries to unite us. But, let me set that aside and say the inauguration of Kamala Harris as vice-president is “a big effing deal.”

Seeing a woman sworn in as vice president is a long time over due for a country that touts democracy. Other democracies have preceded us with a woman being president, prime minister or chancellor. Angela Merkel, Jacinda Arden, Tsai Ing-wen, Sanna Marin, Indira Ghandi, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May all come to mind just to name a few.

Harris is not just breaking the ceiling as a woman, which is a big effing deal by itself. She is the first African-American, the first Asian-American, and part of the first multiracial couple and family to occupy the home of the vice-president. She is uniquely American, as representative of our melting pot as one can get.

But, as a man, let me attempt to address this walk-in-the-shoes moment and what it means. My wife wore pearl earrings to honor Harris’ alma mater as she watched. And, she was crying after Harris was sworn in. A man does not realize how a woman feels to be treated in an overbearing way. Or, to be condescended to. Or to be belittled. Or, to be passed over for a promotion because of her gender. Or, to be sexually harassed or even assaulted.

Sheryl Sandberg wrote the excellent book called “Lean in,” which tells women to lean into opportunity or push back. It was and is a great title in that men are very skilled at leaning in. There is a line, I think from this book, that says a man with lesser skill sets will often feel more qualified for a job than a woman does with more skill sets.

We must layer into Harris’ make-up the fact she is a multiracial woman of color. In an interview on CBS Sunday Morning, she noted she has been told “no” at every step of the ladder. Then, she smiled and said “I eat ‘no’ for breakfast.” That embodies Sandberg’s theme. Just think of all of the young women and young women of color she will influence going forward. Be a leader, be a scientist, be an engineer, be a doctor….don’t accept no as a reason you cannot.

This is a big effing deal. I wish her, Joe Biden and their families and staffs the greatest of success. We need them to succeed in uniting us.

Keith Wilson, Charlotte, Independent

musingsofanoldfart.wordpress.com

Freeing Movie: Dolores Huerta

Published January 31, 2018 by Nan Mykel

Since I totalled my car Jan. 21, I have been wheeless so was glad Alexa suggested she pick me up for a free movie. The free movie was a documentary on Dolores Huerta, first of a series on Women Pioneers sponsored/presented by O.U.’s College of Fine Arts at the local Athena Cinema. I viewed it during the timeframe that our president was delivering the State of the Union Address. and among other things the documentary addressed many of the issues current on the political scene, historically (although Dolores Huerta is still alive and beautiful at 87). She partnered for years with Cesar Chavez in the fight for racial and labor justice. Mexican farm laborers at work and in protest are spotlighted from archived film.

What got me on this kick is the freeing effect it had on me personally, in that Dolores has led such an active life outside society’s restraints. (Almost totally outside). She is a free, loving, courageous woman who has always responded to her inner drummer. The experience has given me a shot in the arm.