Author Archives: wordmatters_admin

Anti-Trans Bathroom Bills, Part I

Note: I wrote the following in 2021. I hadn’t polished it to the point where I was ready to post, but now that I’ve found it, I want it here as background. So I’m posting it now (June, 2023), with minor edits, and backdating to when it was originally written. I don’t actually know which bills were under discussion at the time, nor whether I had specific ones in mind.
____

stylized bathroom sign with desperate-looking figures

“Holding It In” (image purchased from theprintedprint on etsy.)

To anyone who approves of regulating which bathrooms trans kids can use, I want you to ask yourself this: are you, personally, okay with having your genitals (or your birth certificate) checked whenever you use a public bathroom?

Maybe this hasn’t occurred to you. After all, we already know that the point of these bills is not to check everybody who needs a bathroom; the point is to challenge — and publicize — the gender identity of very specific people who already have their gender identity challenged every day.

Many trans people are already so terrified of being challenged on their right to pee that they will wait until they’re desperate before using the bathroom. These bills will make it clear that people are legally allowed to stop them, even at that moment.

Many trans people already avoid using public bathrooms at all costs, even if they’re out all day. Often, that cost is paid in recurrent urinary tract infections and ongoing health problems. These bills will make that worse.

Cleverly, if these bills pass, then trans and gender-non-conforming people will be challenged no matter what they do.* People who switch to the bathroom they’re comfortable with may legally be challenged at any time. Meanwhile, trans people who pass as cisgender will be challenged (inaccurately) if they follow the new rules and use their assigned-at-birth restroom.**

They will be challenged, and, often, they will be cornered. This is not new.

There is a classic and horrifying trope where school bullies corner a trans or gender-bending kid in a bathroom or locker room and force them to pull their pants down so everyone can see. And this is now meant to be codified into law? I know we’ve seen since 2015 that many school bullies never grew up, but really? Adults want this to be the law?

And if these laws pass, then how are they to be enforced? Since you can’t tell by looking (or else there would be no need for proof), the only really equitable way would be for everyone who wants to use a bathroom to prove, on the spot, that they have the legal right to use it.

I’m guessing this would seem somehow unfair, maybe even discriminatory, to those who have used bathrooms themselves without any worries at all for years.

Ostensibly, parents want these laws in order to protect their kids from (made up) scary people who might look at them funny.*** The argument falls apart once you realise that they’re perfectly happy to have other people’s kids looked at instead, in systematic and prurient ways, by other kids, or by adults.

And if the call for proof doesn’t apply to everyone, then it would have to be done by challenges, on a case-by-case basis. And if THAT happens, then I sincerely hope that there will be people, in the places that enforce such laws, who stand by the bathrooms, ready to challenge everyone who comes by.****

_____
*Footnote in 2023: How prescient of me, though I had no idea the laws would be written that way explicitly

**And also outed. Of course.

***Okay, they may claim that it’s to prevent attacks, but (1) trans people are already way more likely to be attacked in bathrooms than anyone else, and (2) attacking people is already illegal!

****(Though it would be nice if there were a way to avoid challenging closeted trans people.)

Primary Guidelines: Seven Rules for Riding out the Election Season

For Democrats, registered or not,* and other progressives, plus anyone else on the blue-purple side: Guidelines for working together with respect, and getting out the vote.

1) Check your registration status.  More than once.

Just to get this out of the way: Make sure you are registered to vote. Vote.org has a page for checking voter registration. Skip the form at the top if you don’t want to sign up for a mailing list; scroll down the page for links to each state’s official site. Also, here is a link to the voter registration deadlines in every US state for 2020 primary elections: A chart, and also a description for each state/territory and the different methods of registering.

So check. Especially if you have recently moved, but also if you haven’t.  Tell your friends to check, especially if they haven’t voted recently. And later, check again. If there’s anything we know, we know that voter suppression is alive and well — and likely to get worse.

Voter Suppression Could Reach New Heights in 2020 – Unless We Push Back (Truthout, 2020).
‘Tidal wave of voter suppression’ washes over states (NBC News, February, 2020)
Vote: Because Others Can’t (My analysis of voter suppression in November, 2018)
The Messy Politics of Voter Purges (Pew Trusts, October, 2019)
In Closely Divided Wisconsin, the Battle for Votes Is Already Underway (NY Times, January, 2020)

2) During the primaries, support the candidate(s) you support.  

This is exactly the right time to argue your case, and your candidate’s case, in the court of public opinion. Learn new things, read the platforms, find out what you can, and tell people what you know.  There is no need for all Democrats to pick a particular candidate ahead of time that everyone can agree on. That’s what the primary elections and caucuses are for.**

Support your candidate(s) loudly and proudly.  Recognize places they may be missing the mark, and consider telling them so.  If you change your mind, do it because you have weighed the issues, not because of peer pressure, or because people are acting as though one candidate or another is somehow more or less presentable.  Don’t go underground.***

3) After the primaries, support the candidate who won.

Someone queried recently, on a thread I was reading, that if we are encouraged to “choose party over candidate” by agreeing to “vote blue no matter who,” then how are we better than the current administration?  My response was twofold: one, that no one of the current candidates in the Democratic field is close to as vicious, demeaning, cruel, or dangerous as the current president: if there were someone like that, this advice would not hold (updated to add: but see Bloomberg, below****); and two, in contrast to “choosing party over candidate,” the current administration and its elected supporters have chosen party over country, over Constitution, and over human decency.

No one here is terrible (again,****).  They all have flaws. And their work is important.  Only by managing our disappointment and unifying our positions will we be able to turn back the tide of cruel and disastrous policies that have flowed from the white house in these years, and cruel and disastrous appointments that will otherwise keep those policies going for generations.

Not Voting is Not A “Statement” (John Pavlovitz, October, 2019)

By the way, I was going to say, “This is not the time for voting third party,” and then I recognised it as the kind of thing that people get told over and over again, as if you just have to wait for one more cycle, and that it’s kind of maddening. I was mad at my parents for saying it in 1980. If they wanted Anderson, why not vote for him instead of Carter? And I think the answer is, while the nation is so closely divided (well, when taking into account voter suppression and the electoral college), with razor thin edges, then the Presidential election will continue to be “not the time” for this kind of statement. I love that third party candidates have been winning at the local and state levels. I want that to be viable. But too many countrywide elections in my lifetime have been close enough to sway by the votes that go to third parties, with devastating effects, and I don’t foresee that changing any time soon.

4) Do not try to convince yourself or others that someone is so bad that you can’t vote for them, because we need those votes later.

If you don’t like someone’s policies, or past behavior, it’s fine to talk about it, or campaign against it.  But understand that there will be someone running against the executive in the White House, and there is no way any of these people could be as dangerous as the current resident.

Remember: there are people all across this country whose lives and livelihoods and day-to-day safety depend on the ending of the current right-wing administration, regardless of where the next President falls along the progressive spectrum.

At the Women’s March last month, I heard activist Tyunique Nelson say the following:
“If you are not centering the experiences of those among you who are most marginalized, then what are you doing?

Pay attention.  Work together. Commit to ending this crisis.

5) Understand that “electability” is a dangerous myth. 

One thing is clear to me: spreading doubts about any candidate’s “electability” will cause more damage than the actual reality of who people will vote for in the general election.

The idea of converging upon an “electable” candidate is extremely loaded.  It makes people want to do what feels safe. It was interesting reading in the articles below the notion that people’s idea of a candidate’s electability is based on who has won previously in the same position.  And so, despite the number of, say, women of color elected to other offices in the past two years, the people who are deemed “electable” turn out mainly to be older, white men.

Honestly, the number of people who don’t vote at all in American elections is so high that trying to pick your candidates based on what other people might or might not do will only lead to less integrity, not better turnout.

And here’s the thing: it’s all just hearsay.
A couple of people have told me, unprompted, that while they personally like her policies, there are many people who simply won’t vote for Elizabeth Warren in the general.  Never the person who’s saying this, you understand — just other people that we can’t know or control. So they don’t want to put their support behind her.

But you know what?  That’s true of every candidate.  People everywhere are vastly different, and every candidate will have large numbers of people who are so angry about something the candidate has done, or so disappointed in a loss by their own candidate, that they will refuse to vote for them in November on principle.  But if we convince ourselves to join those people, then no, our candidate will not have support, and, very possibly, none will have enough.

Our job now is to make voting for everyone more appealing.  If you hear someone saying that “people won’t vote for” a candidate, and that this is therefore a good reason not to support someone, this means it is your job to convince them otherwise.  Find out what they really think, talk about what you think, and focus on yourselves as actual voters, not on the hypothetical ones whose imagined whims might make this decision for you.

Democrats are prioritizing “electability” in 2020. That’s a coded term. (Vox, April, 2019)
The Word Female Presidential Candidates Have Been Hearing Over and Over (NY Times, January, 2020)
Column: Stop telling us about ‘electability’ – Opinion (Metro West Daily News, January, 2020)*****

6) No humiliation, no misogyny, no racism, no insults.  Don’t do it. Don’t stand for it. 

No humiliation:
The photoshopping has begun again, but at least the Sanders toboggan still has everyone smiling and having fun, not like the boxing gif of 2016.  Not like the insidious “I mix up Star Wars and Star Trek”/”I don’t understand jazz” memes that were designed to look like real quotes from Clinton.  Consider no photoshopping at all (do we really want to be like Representative Paul Gosar?).  Don’t forward these things, if their main purpose is to make someone look bad, or to make someone look bad for a laugh. Make sure to call out people who do.

But mostly, don’t try to make anyone out to be a loser, or a “lesser evil”.  No one here is a loser, so don’t use insults or humiliation for contrast with your own candidate, when, instead, you could use policy and your own enthusiasm.  Otherwise, as mentioned above, you run the risk of convincing yourselves and others not to vote. And that is the biggest danger here. If we band together, the Democrat wins.  If we splinter, the Democrat loses, and the reign of cruelty continues.

No misogyny:
It was appalling to see the amount of misogynistic stuff being passed along by supporters of Bernie Sanders in 2016, even from people I know who are otherwise nice people: from persistent double-standards to rude memes, from repeating long-standing right-wing insults to brand new hashtag-bern-the-witch.  And so many of them were based on sexist tropes that should have been gone by then, and certainly not perpetuated by anyone supporting progressive values. The Star Trek and jazz memes I just mentioned? I eventually learned they originated as “blonde” jokes.

And, most fascinating (and infuriating), people bent over backwards to insist that their issues with Hillary Rodham Clinton were not based in sexism.  I’d personally like to see whether that is true. Therefore, I decree that anyone who said, even once, in 2016, “It’s not because she’s a woman: If Elizabeth Warren were running, I’d vote for her,” is now honor bound to follow through.******

America loves women like Hillary Clinton–as long as they’re not asking for a promotion (Sady Doyle, QZ, February, 2016)
The Erasure of Elizabeth Warren Continues (Joan Walsh, The Nation, February, 2020)

No racism, either.  I’m disappointed that the field has become so abruptly white-focused in the past few months, and while I haven’t seen explicit or even covert insults, here again we have the fears of what other people will think and do if we choose someone who is different from what we’ve had before.  Pay attention to civility, and to the fact that voter suppression efforts constantly target people of color. That means the right wing knows that they are vitally important. Make sure we do, too.

And, finally, no anti-Semitism. I haven’t seen any yet directed toward Bernie Sanders, but the tensions are rising around us.  The thing is, we already know what the right wing will throw at a woman or a person of color who’s running for high office (including, if it’s a woman, how vigorously the left will echo it). We don’t yet have any idea what it will look like coming at a secular Jew. Be vigilant. And be aware that anti-Semitism is tricky. It can come as a multitude of ancient stereotypes, and it can come as a false association with Israel and its policies. Beware of this association, as it is used by the American right wing to gain support among Christians, not Jews. Do not confuse criticism of a government’s policies with attacks on a group of people.  And remember, a religious government such as Israel’s does not represent all members of the religion. This one doesn’t even represent all the people who live there. It certainly doesn’t represent those who are actually from other countries.

7) Allow faults. Think, just a little bit, like Republicans, and play the long game.

It is very clear that the current crisis is decades in the making.  There were books in the aughts about right-wing collaborators meeting in secret, planning their takeover.  There was the “Tea Party,” and there were small gains from their side over years and years. There’s been never-ending voter suppression.  Remember that judicial appointments are decades long. Remember that the environmental and social policies that Trump has annihilated over three years took decades to put in place.

Think like Republicans, who would hold their noses and vote for anyone who supports their values and plans, whether the candidates live those values or not.  I think, for the most part, our candidates do live by many, if not most, of the values we uphold. So, honestly, it shouldn’t be much of a nose hold.

And, finally, think of those who are most marginalized, those whose lives are being chipped away by health crises, whose families are separated by immigration policies, whose children are being bullied while white supremacists cheer, whose bodies are being regulated because they are women or because they are trans, whose lives are threatened by systemic racism, whose schools are encouraged to fail through lack of funding, whose water is being threatened, and whose natural spaces and landmarks are devastated by policy changes.*******

And vote with your conscience and their well-being in mind.

———
*Note that some states allow all voters to vote in primaries, while some require primary voters to be registered for the party they’ll be choosing among.
Individual state details: 2020 Primary & Caucus Schedule

**Though I hate that they go on for months and affect each other so much.

***This is actually really important, not going underground.  While the pressure (ranging from sexist memes to a sense of isolation to outright verbal attacks) to support Sanders over Clinton in 2015-2016 led to a group of a million people finding each other and enthusiastically discussing her candidacy online, this meant that people outside the group had no idea how strong her support was.  Some people still talk as though her popular election was entirely half-hearted. And while the same online group has prospered and thrived in the years since, with regular stories of hope and pride that have helped mitigate the ongoing awfulness, I think it’s really important in this round that people’s enthusiasm be heard and respected across the wider populace.

****(Feb. 21) As noted in the comments (and as Senator Elizabeth Warren and others pointed out in the NV debate), Michael Bloomberg actually turns out to be more dangerous that I’d realised when I wrote this post. While I’m expecting to vote for him if I must, I do not want to have to choose among power-hungry billionaires, particularly sexist, racist ones, and to normalize the wealth=power dynamic. So here are my main campaign points against him:
– He poured millions of dollars into Senator Pat Toomey’s reelection campaign in 2016. Sen. Toomey (R., PA) was adamant in rejecting a hearing for SCOTUS nominee Merrick Garland throughout that year, and he has been almost unrelenting in his support for Trump ever since. People have protested outside Sen. Toomey’s offices every week for three years, and he does not deign to address them.
– He escalated “Stop and Frisk” in New York City while mayor, leading to frisking thousands of Black and brown people, most of which resulted in no charges or arrests (but ongoing harm).
– He settled multiple sexual harassment accusations with required nondisclosure agreements.
– He has a long list of racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic comments, not to mention the denial of previous things he’s said, which seems awfully familiar…

*****I do have a particular gripe with this article: it contains the line, “oh, if you must, talk about their hair.”  The thing is, hair is a flashpoint in discussions of politics and respectability and the double standard in talking about women and men.  In the 2016 election, there was a Sanders-supporting meme that listed some qualifications for the President of the United States. Most of them were appropriate and clever.  But one, presumably intended to be funny by poking fun at their own candidate, was “bad hair”. Ha ha, Bernie Sanders has flyaway hair. But here’s the thing: a Presidential candidate can get away with “bad hair” only by being a man, and a white man at that.  And this man was running against not just any woman but Hillary Rodham Clinton, a woman whose hair was discussed all the time, a woman who was told 40 years ago that if she didn’t change her hair and her name, her husband would not be reelected as Governor of Arkansas.  If she had allowed her hair to be messy, that would have doomed her chances in public opinion, and that, unlike for Bernie Sanders, would have translated into lack of votes. In a corollary, it’s also extremely likely that Barack Obama could not have been elected President if Michelle Obama had worn her hair in a natural style.  So, no. Hair is not a thing to talk about in the context of elections where women are present.

******Stay tuned…I may go and check up on people who spoke out publicly on this one.

*******Sorry; that’s nearly everyone.

National Coming Out Day and Time Travel: A Belated Post

(Note: Posted October 2019, updated in 2020.)

A folded scarf in long, crocheted, rainbow stripes.

My first crochet project, ca. 2003.

For the two weeks before I began writing it, I was expecting this post to be (1) a lot shorter and (2) centered on the fact that when I came out 30 years ago on October 10, the Jewish calendar — 19-year cycle notwithstanding — matched up with the same secular days as this year, with Erev Rosh Hashanah on September 29 and Yom Kippur on October 9. It seemed significant that the context for my sudden, startling revelation, coming the day after a fast as it did, should be echoed here 30 years later: Yom Kippur (10/9), Personal Coming Out Day (10/10), National Coming Out Day (10/11).

This is no longer my focus. It is still about dates, though. And about time.*

Things change dramatically over time. Sometimes it takes 30 years, and sometimes it takes two years, or a single day. When I had my sudden, startling revelation on October 10, 1989, I was on a safe, supportive college campus, and I knew at the time that October 11 would be National Coming Out Day and that October 12 would be my frosh hall’s Gay and Lesbian Awareness Workshop.** This was only the beginning of my questioning process, so I wasn’t coming out to anyone else yet. But at that point, I knew that the very next day I could stay quiet in a sea of supportive celebration. I knew that the day after that I could sit in a circle and declare myself a lesbian, and no one would know whether I was role-playing or not, and I could get questions answered without fear. I knew I was incredibly lucky.***

A year or so later, I was in the campus GLBA office and noticed a photo on the wall. It was a cluster of students with signs on the National Mall, and it was labeled, “March on Washington, October 11, 1987”. And I stared. I am good at dates, and I am good at patterns. I knew, unequivocally, in that moment, that National Coming Out Day was created to commemorate that march. And that that meant that National Coming Out Day was created in 1988, and that 1989 was only the second one ever. And I was stunned by how close I had come to missing that day of celebration and power and comfort that I had thought was already an institution.

This is not to say I had taken my safe space for granted. It was just astonishment at how quickly and abruptly — and arbitrarily — things can change. After all, there wasn’t any particular day set up to commemorate the March on Washington for Lesbian, Gay, and Bi Rights that I did go to, on April 25, 1993. And yet the power of that march resonated later in powerful ways. I always thought, until five or ten years ago, that the national conversation about marriage equality started in 1994, when Hawai’i made its ruling that a marriage had to be able, based only on gender (not on actual fertility or intention), to produce children. But in fact, the 1993 march had a platform of demands, and one of the demands was an expansion of the definitions of family, including the recognition of domestic partnerships and legalization of same sex marriages.

Another thing that began in 1994 was the introduction of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) to Congress. Before this (from 1974), the focus had been promoting the Equality Act to expand the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ENDA has still not passed, despite being introduced (with gender identity added in 2009) to every Congress save one until 2014, when support wavered and efforts returned to the Equality Act, which this year passed the House but has not moved in the Senate. Instead, we now have the ACLU arguing employment discrimination cases in front of the Supreme Court, and an unfavorable Court at that.

I found myself surprised this week, however, to keep reading online comments framing these court cases as an unthinkable new disaster in this time, from people who were somehow stunned that it should become legal to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people in employment. And maybe those commenters live in the states where such rights are protected. The truth is, though, that there is no federal law against this discrimination, just years of painstaking work to establish scattered local and state protections. If the justices rule against us, those laws could be superseded, which indeed would be a devastating push backward. But if, by some chance, they vote in our favor, then we would gain federal protection that we have never had.

[Edited in 2020 to add: And they did rule in our favor! See Bostock vs. Clayton County.****]

It’s been very curious being around long enough to see how much the conversation and the climate have changed over 30 years. Watching and welcoming the emerging gender identity movement, particularly over the last decade, has felt new and fascinating and also strangely familiar. From young kids coming out and public activism to bathroom bills and ongoing violence to language change and new books and new accommodation, I keep feeling, yes, this is where we were back in the ‘90s: visibility and backlash and violence and change. And in the nineties I was told by people who lived through the rise of third wave feminism in the ’70s: this is the way it goes: visibility and backlash and change. And so we all keep going, being visible, speaking our truth, and making change.

I began this essay on October 11, and it’s now grown enough that I’m finishing it a week later, and thus I’ve gotten to see, spread around my Facebook feed, the dawning of a new Day: the second instance of International Pronouns Day, begun last year on the third Wednesday in October. This is only the second one ever.

And this reminded me of something important that did happen just after Yom Kippur this year. We shared our break-fast meal that evening with longtime family friends, and since there were people at the table who didn’t know each other, one of the family, in support of her sibling, suggested we go around and do names and pronouns.

Now, I’ve been including my pronouns in my email signature at work for the past year and a half, but, I realised as it neared my turn, this was the first time I’d ever done it out loud. And then I looked at my kid, for whom this ritual was also new, and watched to see what he’d say. And even though he had only “she” and “they” modeled before his turn, he gamely followed the pattern and said, “…and I use he/him pronouns.” And thus we move forward, one word or day or year at a time, toward safe space, toward recognizing human dignity, and toward comprehensive human rights.


——
*Though, to be fair, only about the most mundane type of time travel.

**The CoLeGA (Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Awareness, later renamed BiLeGA [and eventually, in 1999, BiLeGaTA]) Awareness workshop was my favorite of the required awareness workshops, and it was cleverly designed. Everyone would sit in a circle, with two student facilitators, and everyone had to say, in turn, “I am a lesbian” or “I am a gay man”. That was the only thing we were required to say out loud. (To be fair, there were a few students who refused to do the workshop at all, based on this.) What followed was a role-play, in which the facilitators would give prompts, such as, “Tell me about a time you felt discriminated against,” or “How does it feel to tell people?” and anyone who wanted could reply. If we didn’t identify as gay or lesbian (or bi), we were asked to draw on our experiences based on other identities, or to imagine what it would be like. For the second half, we wrote questions on pieces of paper that we didn’t want to ask aloud, and the facilitators read them out and answered them as best they could.

***Actually, I wasn’t quiet on National Coming Out Day; I was fairly loud and enthusiastic, and I’m pretty sure it was even my proposal (earlier in the week) that for our hall’s turn at the dorm’s Wednesday “wine and cheese” on October 11, we serve chocolate chip cookie dough and milk, both colored with pink food coloring. But I wasn’t loud for myself, quite yet.

****Note that this decision, similar to the provisions of ENDA, covers only employment, leading to renewed focus on the Equality Act, including in the Biden campaign: “Biden will make enactment of the Equality Act during his first 100 days as President a top legislative priority.”

A Tally of Names

I have started a book that is not by Ellen Klages.

Okay, so most books are not by Ellen Klages. This one is in fact by Robin Talley, who has written two other YA books I really like, What We Left Behind and Lies We Tell Ourselves.

This one, appropriately named Pulp*, is about lesbian pulp novels from the 1950s, with characters in the 1950s and characters in the present, and alternating stories, and stories within stories, and so it quite forcefully puts me in mind of Ellen Klages.**

So here’s the thing about Pulp: It has a LOT of characters. Possibly not more than other YA novels, but the book has so many pairs of lives in parallel, that…well, basically, I wanted a place to write all the names down. So here:

In the present we have Abby, a senior in high school, who’s pining after her ex-girlfriend Linh (now “just friends”), and who discovers, on the internet, a lesbian pulp novel by the elusive Marian Love, about a girl named Elaine who goes off to New York City and meets a girl named Paula in a bar in Greenwich Village. Abby, who’s into writing fanfic***, is enamored by the new genre and decides for her senior writing project to try her hand at a lesbian pulp novel (something ironic, to subvert the genre) about two girls named Gladys and Henrietta. And she tries to research — and maybe contact — Marian Love.

And in the 1950s there is Janet, a senior in high school, who’s pining after her best friend Marie (now graduated and with a new job), and who discovers, on a bus station wire rack, a lesbian pulp novel by the mysterious Dolores Wood, about two girls named Betty and Sam who meet each other in New York City’s Greenwich Village. Janet, who’s hoping to go to college and become a journalist, is stunned to see her feelings echoed anywhere outside her own head and decides to try her hand at writing a pulp novel of her own, very very secretly, about two girls named Elaine and Paula. Oh, and she tries to contact Dolores Wood.

And, just to be clear, there are excerpts included from all the books and manuscripts.

So. Just so we’ve gotten everything sorted out. Thank you.

I will now proceed with my reading.

—————-
*Or, occasionally, Plup

**For further reference see “Time Gypsy,” my favorite of her stories, which I read in the collection Portable Childhoods and which contains actual time travel, and her time-bouncing novel Passing Strange. She also has a series of middle grade historical novels: The Green Glass Sea; White Sands, Red Menace; and Out of Left Field. They’re all amazing, and I love that her MG books are very straightforward and sensible and yet manage to share worlds with her more fantastical and magical adult books.

***Oh, and just to be clear, Pulp has excerpts from more inlaid stories than Rainbow Rowell’s Fangirl****; just saying…

****which is the book that left me wanting to read two series that didn’t exist, one of which was fanfic of the other. Of course, then the one actually got written, but it was kind of standalone and had some clear departures from the fanfic version, which was a bit…odd.

Some Holiday Lunacy! Equinox, Purim, Passover, and Easter

Lunar Phase Calendar 2019Today (in the northern hemisphere) we welcome the Vernal Equinox — a time of balance — along with the full moon that heralds the arrival of Purim.*

Purim occurs at the mid-point of the Hebrew month of Adar, or in this case Adar Sheni (“second Adar”), the second instance of Adar in what is a leap year in the Jewish calendar. The leap years sprinkled along the 19-year cycle ensure that the lunar calendar keeps pace with the solar calendar, instead of traveling along the year like the Islamic calendar. Indeed, if we skipped the repeat of Adar this year, we’d be getting ready right now for Passover, which begins, also on the full moon, just a month later.

I’ve always been fascinated by the connections between the world we live in and the systems and words we use to describe and organize it. So I remember being completely stunned to learn in college that I could find the Jewish holidays by looking outside at night. I’d grown up learning and celebrating the holidays, and I’d always known that the Jewish calendar was a lunar calendar, but I thought that was an ancient thing. I hadn’t understood that those connections between the names and counting and the real world would still be intact — after all, our months aren’t like that. But calendars are designed, whatever their focus, to keep going, as best they can. So unlike Gregorian months, which only approximate the moon cycles that inspire their name, Hebrew months begin, every time, with the first new sliver of moon.**

I also knew that Jewish holidays have specific dates (as do holidays in any calendar): Chanukah on 25th of Kislev, Tu b’Shevat (as named) on the 15th of Shevat. I hadn’t paid much attention to the others, and so now I had the pleasure of learning that most of the major holidays occur on the 15th of their month … and coincide with the full moon. Tu B’Shevat. Purim. Passover. Sukkot. Because full moon is a great time to celebrate.***
(Begin 5/4 time full moonlight dance here!)

So. And then, some years later, I found myself looking through a list of Easter dates**** and wondered what was up with the one Christian holiday that traveled around as much — in fact possibly more — than Jewish ones.

And I was most charmed to learn that it combined everything: Easter comes on the first Sunday after the first full moon after the vernal equinox.

So, okay, here comes the equinox, timed for 5:58 pm Eastern Daylight Time (9:58 pm UTC, 10:58 pm Central European Time); when exactly is the moon full? As it turns out, just about four hours later!

So why isn’t it Easter week right now?

Because, as I just learned in the last week, there is an Ecclesiastical rule that declares Equinox unequivocally to be March 21.*****

…Interestingly, those same ecclesiastical rules state that the vernal equinox is fixed on March 21 (for European longitudes), even though from the years 2008 through 2103 the equinox will occur no later than March 20. In fact, in the year 2020, for the first time since 1896, spring will arrive on the 19th across the entire United States, and in 2048, that will happen across the whole of Europe.

So, while in an astronomical sense, March 20 marks the first full moon of spring, so far as the Christian church is concerned, we must put the Paschal Term on hold for a month until the next full moon, on April 19. That also occurs on Good Friday, and at sundown that same day, Passover begins. Two days later will come a rather late Easter Sunday, on April 21.

An even more extreme situation will take place in 2038. In that year, the equinox will fall on March 20 with a full moon the very next day (a Sunday). So, astronomically, Easter should fall on March 28 of that year. In reality, however, as mandated by the rules of the church, Easter in 2038 will be observed as late as it can possibly come, on April 25!

So. Many things to ponder. And a month to wait, for both Passover and Easter. In the meanwhile, I wish you a time of great balance, patience, and equilibrium, on the day that everyone gets the same amount of daylight, no matter where they are, all over the world.


______

*Also the equinox-related Eostara, Holi, Norouz/Char-Shanbe-Soori, Higan, the Autumnal Equinox in the southern hemisphere, and more … including the many cultures that celebrate the vernal equinox as the first day of Spring.******

**What I learned next, from posters in the campus center, and from the meetings they echoed, was that this first day of each month is known as Rosh Chodesh, head of the month, as Rosh Hashanah is head of the year. And it turns out that Rosh Chodesh, which I had never heard of, is celebrated as a women’s holiday. Amazing that I didn’t learn this in Hebrew School. (Hmm.)

***Chanukah is a notable exception. It’s not a major holiday, except in that it coincides with so many (other) Solstice holidays. And a number of years ago, it was pointed out to me (thank you, Otter) that Chanukah, known as the Festival of Lights though its name means “Rededication,” doesn’t just occur during the darkest time of year; it also neatly covers the darkest time of month. Starting a few days before the end of the month of Kislev, and ending a few days after, the holiday takes us into the darkness and then back out again, while the lights of the Chanukah menorah grow ever-brighter.

****Possibly this was when I was confirming that my first cat’s birthday was even earlier than I’d thought. We were told she was born on Easter. And so we (okay, I) looked it up and thenceforward celebrated her birthday on March 25 … until discovering that I’d remembered wrong, and Easter that year had actually been March 23.

*****It’s not clear to me what time or time zone is relevant here, or whether the moon must follow the entire day or just its beginning.

******I don’t, though. I consider this to be mid-spring, in the midst of the winter-to-summer transition process that is spring. But that’s another post. Oh, wait; it actually is another post.

Vote: Because Others Can’t

If you, or someone you know, is wondering “Why should I bother to vote today?” my current answer isn’t about the vast sweeping changes across the nation in the past two years and the fate of our democracy. My current answer is this:

Vote today to compensate for those across the country whose votes are being suppressed, some perhaps as “unintended consequences” of apparently well-meaning changes* and some as blatant disenfranchisement:
– For example, in North Dakota, where the Supreme Court** just upheld a Voter ID law that requires a street address in order to vote, and where it is completely standard for the government not to issue street addresses on Native American reservations whose streets often don’t have names or numbers.
– Or in North Carolina, where five years ago — in fact, the very day after the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act*** (see p. 10 of the 2016 decision linked in this paragraph) — the state eliminated same-day voter registration and reduced both early voting and Sunday voting, explicitly because counties with strong Sunday voting tended to be “disproportionately” African-Americans who tended to vote Democratic. The law was overturned in 2016, but the justification went viral a few weeks ago.
– Or in Dodge City, Kansas, where the distribution of erroneous polling place information was only adding insult to injury. The notices said that voting would occur at the standard sole polling place in the center of town, but in fact they had already made the actual polling place get out of Dodge. The only place today for the primarily Latin@ city residents to vote is outside of town, 1 mile from the nearest bus stop.
– Or in Georgia, where, among other things, people’s addresses were purged from voter rolls based on when they last voted, and they were not notified. There are also problems with voting machines, absentee ballots, and processing registrations. Also, there are many fewer polling places across the state, something that has been growing since, hm…the 2013 gutting of the Voting Rights Act.

Some other good reasons to vote:

1) Demographics. Politicians pay attention to who votes in elections, and if you’re part of a demographic that polls as low turnout, the representatives may decide that your issues aren’t the ones to focus on.

2) History. No matter who you are, many of your ancestors have been legally unable to vote in this country. For those who struggled, fought, died, were imprisoned and force-fed, or marched and endured, your use of your vote now can honor their courage.

3) Meanness vs. civility. The vast sweeping changes across the nation in the past two years and the state of our democracy. The fate of America and all the people in it.

4) In case anyone thinks one vote doesn’t make a big enough difference****, I will simply copy some lyrics here from an earlier post:

Step by Step

lyrics to "Step by Step"

sign for 2017 women’s march

Step by step, the longest march can be won, can be won.
Many stones to form an arch, singly none, singly none,
And by union what we will can be accomplished still;
Drops of water turn a mill, singly none, singly none.

As far as I know, the words are from the preamble to the constitution of the United Mine Workers (UMWA), and it was set to music by Pete Seeger. I learned it from Sweet Honey, and I found performances of them both:
Video (Sweet Honey in the Rock): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXwM3pJFqAc
Recording and lyrics (Pete Seeger): https://genius.com/Pete-seeger-step-by-step-lyrics

——–
*There’s a Reuters quote in the Snopes article (cited later in the post) that says,

“Republicans have said laws like the one in North Carolina are needed to prevent voter fraud. Democrats have said such laws are voter suppression measures intended to make it harder for groups that tend to back Democratic candidates, including black and Hispanic voters, to cast ballots.”

I think this is a problematically complex answer.
My answer would be:
Voter suppression IS voter fraud. Go ahead and prevent that.
And further:
Is fraud prevention worth it if one person is prevented from voting as a result? Ten? 100? How many of your own friends’ or family’s votes would you trade for the “prevention of voter fraud”?

**with Gorsuch, without Kavanaugh, despite my previous belief. The majority included Sonia Sotomayor, however, which surprises me.

***Apparently SCOTUS felt that the southern states in question had been behaving well enough that there was no longer a need to require federal oversight of new changes in voting law. Within a day, as I recall, there were six new changes in voting law among the previously constrained states.

****Also, there is somewhere a list of major historical decisions decided by very few votes. I’ll try to find it. I mean, besides the 2016 Presidential. Oh, here’s one.

On the Persistence of Memory

Salvador Dalí, The Persistence of Memory

Salvador Dalí, The Persistence of Memory

What does it mean when someone is asked to prove themselves as credible by recalling a date?

It is not always obvious when people will remember dates. Sometimes — and for some people — a date is seared into memory by events. Or there’s a date that you choose to remember, in order to commemorate, or celebrate, or simply take note of, when it comes around again. One might think that having a crime committed against you would mean that you carefully note down all the particulars … but when the crime is one that you would rather forget, or when you’re not sure anyone considers it a crime … maybe you don’t write it down.

I keep being reminded of hearing Ronald Reagan on the radio, saying, in response to a question about having a particular conversation on a particular day, “No, I don’t remember. Who remembers what they were doing on August 9, 1985?!”*

And I remember being outraged, because (1) remembering the exact date didn’t seem nearly as important as whether the conversation had happened at all, so it seemed he was using a loophole to avoid answering, and (2) what kind of question was that — after all, I remembered what I had been doing on August 9, 1985.

I felt extremely self-righteous about this, because his implication was that no one would remember a date, when I found it a point of pride that I remembered All the Dates. I didn’t have a photographic memory; it was much more type-focused than that: names, lists, the position of a word on a page, dates. Not years — it would be a long time before I really got a good sense of history in my head — but dates from year to year. I kept a diary, and I referred to it, and I remembered … not actually all the dates, but many, many significant dates. I remembered when my concerts and plays had been, and when I saw Cats (December 29, 1984), and when I’d been hurt, and when I’d had awkward conversations, and when I’d had amazing conversations. I’d sometimes refer to certain events by the dates when they happened, when writing about them later. “That October 17, 1987, conversation.” Or “September 22nd skies,” which is still a description I use, because it happened two years in a row on the same day**.

I also knew many many many people’s birthdays.

Point One of this post is that I was surrounded by people who were not like this. Most people around me did not measure their lives in calendars and dates. They were amazed that I might remember the date of their party last year, or when we had some conversation, or that I knew their birthday.

Point Two is that, for the most part, even I no longer remember those dates. I remember when I saw Cats, but I no longer remember what conversation happened on October 17 in high school. I still know a lot of birthdays***, and I remember vividly some of the events and conversations from adolescence, including traumatic ones. But my memory — my lovely, unusual memory — of dates in the eighties is no longer something I can rely on.

So when people ask someone to produce exact dates from 30-40 years ago as a way to determine whether an event happened at all, my single data point says to me that most people can do this only tenuously at best, and that instead of a true connection what they are providing here is only an arbitrary test, and a ploy for the influence of public opinion.

——–
*I’m not actually sure when this was. My attempts to verify it online have led me to this 1992 deposition about the Iran-Contra scandal, in which
1) I don’t actually see this exchange about August 9, 1985 (or any other date), and from my own memory-context I suspect it was different, earlier testimony that I heard (maybe 1986 or 1990) — or perhaps my memory is faulty;
2) I’m stunned at how many questions they kept asking while he told them he didn’t remember — this deposition was two years before he told the public that he had Alzheimer’s disease;
3) And finally, that in this deposition it’s very, very clear that the dates don’t matter; he simply doesn’t remember the conversations at all. Which throws a rather different light on my reactions to his out-of-context defensiveness.

**It’s a patchy, cloudy sky at night: a surprisingly vivid weaving that covers the whole sky, with deep blue in all the patches. And maybe some moonlight beyond, or stars, going in and out.

***I get frustrated with Facebook, sometimes, for telling me birthdays I would otherwise surprise people by knowing. Other times, however, I realise I would have forgotten and I’m grateful for the reminders. Tricky balance.

Songs of the Day (June 25, 2018)

Here are some songs that came to mind while I traveled to and from a family rally and potluck in my neighborhood Monday night, in support of all families, and families staying together, and in protest of the anti-immigration policies of the current administration.

We sat under the trees and shared food, and children of all different ages and skin tones and family origins ran around the wide, open field and played together.

children running in a wide field, under the moonMany people, big and small, took turns with the little megaphone.

We learned from civil rights activists and immigration lawyers.

We chanted:
The people united will never be divided* / El pueblo unido jamás será vencido
and
It is our duty to fight for freedom / It is our duty to win.
We must love each other and support each other. / We have nothing to lose but our chains.
**

The children were asked what they like to do together with their families.
(Travel, play, cooking together…)
Everyone was asked to call out completions for “Family is…”
(Love, comfort, togetherness…)

We sang and learned various songs, including “Open the Doors” by Emily Joy Goldberg (led by Chana Rothman) and “Step by Step,” below, which I co-led with my wife.

It was a powerful, heartfelt, and hopeful gathering. And I would like to surround it with more songs I would have wanted to share, had they been better suited for sharing in circles.

1) Refugee

Women in search of safety
Children in need of food
Struggling for our freedom
So I am a refugee

Powerful and resilient***
Seeing my people through
Sharing my truth and wisdom
So I am a refugee

I am a builder Hear my voice
I am a seeker Hear my voice
I am a dreamer Hear my voice
And I am a refugee…

Pat Humphries & Sandy Opatow, “Refugee,” from the album One x 1,000,000 = Change.
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2nFM7APHS8
Recording and lyrics: https://emmasrevolution.com/track/1287069/refugee

2) Cold Cup of Water

…We come from places our children can’t grow, some of us south of the border.
Seeking safety and wages and work, dignity, food and water.
From harm may we be delivered.
Demand though we may be fired.
To meet and bargain together
For all workers, clean and safe shelter.
And a cold cup of water …

Pat Humphries, “Cold Cup of Water,” from the album Hands.
Recording and lyrics: https://emmasrevolution.com/track/1288715/cold-cup-of-water

This is a song for farm workers and collective bargaining. It seems especially relevant right now, as this article attests (see links within on both farm workers and restaurant workers).

3) Walls and Windows

"The wall that stands between us could be a window too"

sign for 2018 women’s march

…Oh, may we live to see the day when walls of words and fear,
No longer stand between the truth and dreams.
The walls and windows rise into the distance and we dare
To look into the mirror and see Peace.
…The wall that stands between us could be a window too.
When I look into the mirror I see you.

Judy Small & Pat Humphries, “Walls and Windows,” recorded on separate albums.
Video (Judy Small): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttqrC6NIjk4
Recording and lyrics (Pat Humphries): https://emmasrevolution.com/track/1288865/walls-and-windows

4) The New Underground Railroad

…Now the war rages on in El Salvador
You hear a midnight knock on a midnight door
And a church opens in the middle of the night
Half a family walks in, faces filled with fright
…On the new Underground Railroad
Will they be welcome up here?

Holly Near, “The New Underground Railroad,” from the album Singing with You.
Recording: http://www.jdavidmoore.net/works/new-underground-railroad
This recording is an arrangement commissioned (and performed) by MUSE, Cincinnati’s Women’s Choir.
I was not able to find an online recording by Holly Near and Ronnie Gilbert, except that Slacker Radio seems to have it, so if you have a Premium account there, you can select this song.

5) Step by Step

lyrics to "Step by Step"

sign for 2017 women’s march

Step by step, the longest march can be won, can be won.
Many stones to form an arch, singly none, singly none,
And by union what we will can be accomplished still;
Drops of water turn a mill, singly none, singly none.

As far as I know, the words are from the preamble to the constitution of the United Mine Workers (UMWA), and it was set to music by Pete Seeger****. I learned it from Sweet Honey, and I found performances of them both:
Video (Sweet Honey in the Rock): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXwM3pJFqAc
Recording and lyrics (Pete Seeger): https://genius.com/Pete-seeger-step-by-step-lyrics

6) Would You Harbor Me?

Would you harbor me? Would I harbor you?

Ysaye Barnwell of Sweet Honey in the Rock, “Would You Harbor Me?”
Video (Sweet Honey in the Rock, set to photo montage): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0XBXJjoXJ4

———–
*I originally learned the English ending as “defeated” rather than “divided,” even though it doesn’t rhyme, and indeed the translation (vencido, vanquished) and the long history of the chant bear that out. Here, however, “divided” is exactly the right sentiment.

**This turns out to be by Assata Shakur, Black Revolutionary, as the ending lines of a 1973 letter/manifesto from prison, “To My People”: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Assata_Shakur.

***For a very long time I thought this line said “Powerful and Brazilian”…

****And possibly someone else. I had this information a few years ago, and I seem to remember that.

…Or All the Seas with Plastic

My workplace right now has a huge focus on sustainability, which is awesome, and yet also a startling amount of conspicuous waste, including much plasticware. I have been thinking very intensely about this particular image lately, and I haven’t found any better way to express exactly these sentiments. The poster is no longer available to purchase, so I asked permission to post it here. Turns out it’s available under a Creative Commons license (see details in caption).*

Come on, people. Wash your spoons.**

 
 
——
(Title is a reference to the story “Or All the Seas with Oysters” by Avram Davidson.)

*Also, yay, I got a question added to an FAQ!
**With the understanding that some people don’t have enough spoons*** to wash spoons.
***(That is, spoons as physical and/or emotional resources.)

Squirrels Squirreling Things Away

Pretty much anyone who knows me knows that I am passionate about gender parity in language and particularly about eliminating the false generic masculine (which is using masculine language to refer to beings of unknown or unspecified gender). If they know me well, they know that I often focus on gender attribution for nonhumans, in real life and in children’s books, and if they spend a lot of time with me outdoors, that this often comes up in reference to squirrels.

And so, this story:

grey squirrel in Norway maple treetree

A different squirrel, who has found something to eat.

Walking from the train, I beheld a squirrel which elegantly poked its head up from the grass and then dashed across my path and up a tree, carrying what looked like part of a cardboard ice cream carton. I turned to the random person walking near me, and we joked briefly about whether it had found something to read or something to eat.

“Or to use for making a nest*,” I added.

“Yeah, that’s what I was thinking,” she replied, “Nesting material.” And then she laughed and added, suddenly, “I bet he thought he’d won the … or she, thought she’d won the jackpot!”

A beautiful example of the unthinking sexist trope wherein nonhuman animals default to male** coming up against the sexist (but slightly more accurate***) trope wherein nonhuman parents default to female**** and colliding, inside someone’s head.

————-
*It turns out that squirrel nests in the branches of trees are actually called dreys (or drays). Drey nests are distinguished from cavity nests, or dens, which are inside something, such as a tree hollow.

**With certain specific exceptions that default to female with astonishing regularity, among them cats, hippos, kangaroos, elephants, cows***** (but not always chickens), and, of course, parents.

***In terms of parents apt to be encountered with their offspring.

****With the exception of seahorses. And maybe penguins. And people who persist in the first trope despite all evidence to the contrary, like the person a friend of mine saw at the zoo once who apparently exclaimed, “Look at the gorilla nursing his baby!”******

*****It was actually years before I understood that cows were only one part of a species. “What do you mean, they’re *all* female? That can’t be right…”

******My own example of this is the time I saw a gorilla at the zoo, lying on its back before the window, legs splayed, both feet up against the glass. And a man said to his child, “Hey, look at him!” And all I could think (but didn’t say) was, “If that gorilla were actually male, I think you might be trying to stop your child from looking…”