I have been thinking a lot lately about love, specifically love for community. If there is one thing I am sure of, it is the fact that I will sacrifice and struggle for the rest of my life to try and make this world a better place. My body will know no other work than work for others. I know without hesitation that I can make changes albeit small, but lasting changes to this world. I do this because I love my community. I was raised to believe that we are on this earth to help each other, we exist as a unit not as individuals. If our community is suffering and we have the means to help we must.
because for me these things are TRUE:
I know that inequality is not a permanent reality of human society, it is rather a created and ingrained system set up to maintain the power of a few.
I know that inherently the vast majority of people are good, that all of us need love, security, purpose, food, water and shelter.
I know that by maintaining inequality we are only creating collective suffering. For all we know the person that may cure cancer, be the most brilliant leader, or the creator of the most beautiful art this world has ever seen- is instead suffering to survive. Is working so hard that they can barely think of anything beyond how they will find their next meal, or how they will clothe their children.
I know that the struggle to create a better world is all of our responsibility.
I feel this responsibility deep in my soul. I often feel that my life is not solely for my living, but rather that I live for my community. I do not feel this weight on my shoulders to be oppressive but to be uplifting. I can feel the strength of my ancestors guiding me. I feel this so strongly that the mention of accepting oppression, accepting inequality when I was young would send me to immediate tears, and as I got older to immediate fury.
This is what I struggle with now. This fury. On the one hand it is a burning fire, a passion, that drives me to continue. A fury grounded in my immense love for my community. Out of a need to protect, and defend against what I perceive to be an attack on our humanity. But it perplexes me how fury comes from love.
I do not believe we can build a new and better society from changes created out of anger. But as Frantz Fanon says Decolonization is violent. And we must decolonize ourselves and our society to achieve equity and equality. But violent struggle often brings about a violent society, so how do we stop that? How do we decolonize with love?
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Geronimo and Bin Laden
These past few days, I have been in a sort of disbelief. Am I the only person who is not relieved, but more scared, who is not rejoicing but legitimately sad that a man is dead? That a family has to bury their loved one?
Terrorism is the reason everyone is okay with his death. He was a terrorist, he is a non-governmental agency that perpetuated a violent act against civilians. And by he I mean Bin Laden. This alone justifies his murder- because he is the thinker the leader(not the actor). With his life comes the possibility of many more terrorist acts. As with most things I have to ask why? Why did he do it?
Well I don't know that much about Bin Laden all I can say with true certainty is he did not do it because Islam made him and that he cared deeply for his culture, religion, and people ( albeit in a warped fashion). I can also say with certainty that we have been declaring an informal war all across the world and against many peoples. In the Arab-Muslim world we have been inserting dictators who have done horrible things to their people, we have "accidently" been killing civilians for a long time, and the globalization of western culture has slowly been killing cultures across the world. To me it seems terrorism, and especially 911 was to bring the war that we perpetuate on other countries home to our own soil. Because please know that we have killed WAY more civilians on their soil than they have on ours. Maybe in a different world, a more analytical world, we would have asked- Why did they just run planes into our buildings and kill thousands? What pain must they be enduring to commit such an egregious act? Instead of immediately using it as an excuse to go to war- to commit government sanctioned acts of terrorism upon them.
Geronimo in his time I am sure was considered a terrorist. The US for one didn't recognize our (as Native peoples) form of governance- rendering Geronimo a non-governmental agent inflicting acts of violence- which is the definition of a terrorist. So we know that in terms of the US government, Geronimo was a terrorist. What we also know as Native Peoples is that he was a honored leader. A man that fought against occupation: the loss of our land and culture. He did not consider women and children as justifiable targets. He also did not inflict acts of violence to inspire terror but rather to battle against the war the US was waging on our people. He was driven to violent acts, because of all the violence we were facing as a people, he himself lost his entire family to this violence. Geronimo was a fierce and brilliant warrior, who will forever be honored because of the sacrifices he made for his people.
To me there are similarities in the circumstances that drove these men to war. Both felt the US Government was killing their people (metaphorically or physically or both). That is about where the similarity ends, but yet still the US Government and Military would utter their names as if they were comparable. Clearly the US still thinks that we as Native people's were/are terrorists. This is where I want to become critical of our participation in this war, in this celebration of a man's death, a despicable man yes, but a man whose people have suffered at the hands of our government and and a people whose hatred of the US and anger is justified- not in killing thousands of innocents but justified anger nonetheless.
In the end, my question for my people and all oppressed peoples is: If the US government still sees us as terrorists, why do we ally ourselves with them? It seems to me we have more in common with other oppressed peoples than with the US government and its military complex. I challenge us all to challenge wars in our names, against people whom we may have more in common with than the people we share this country with. The US government declares war on brown, yellow, black, red, working class, women, and disabled everyday, this war has let it terrorize people of the Muslim faith as well. Although I do not endorse acts of violence as a means of combating this war against us. I do endorse critical thought, that expands beyond our own borders. Is it so hard to understand that what oppresses us, may oppress others? That our government is currently and has been for a long time responsible for the decimation of cultures all across the world? That they do it in our name? That they convince us that it is right. So much so that we celebrate the death of another human, and the continuation of violence (the exact opposite of a solution) as if our sports team won?
It is a sad predicament we live in.
Terrorism is the reason everyone is okay with his death. He was a terrorist, he is a non-governmental agency that perpetuated a violent act against civilians. And by he I mean Bin Laden. This alone justifies his murder- because he is the thinker the leader(not the actor). With his life comes the possibility of many more terrorist acts. As with most things I have to ask why? Why did he do it?
Well I don't know that much about Bin Laden all I can say with true certainty is he did not do it because Islam made him and that he cared deeply for his culture, religion, and people ( albeit in a warped fashion). I can also say with certainty that we have been declaring an informal war all across the world and against many peoples. In the Arab-Muslim world we have been inserting dictators who have done horrible things to their people, we have "accidently" been killing civilians for a long time, and the globalization of western culture has slowly been killing cultures across the world. To me it seems terrorism, and especially 911 was to bring the war that we perpetuate on other countries home to our own soil. Because please know that we have killed WAY more civilians on their soil than they have on ours. Maybe in a different world, a more analytical world, we would have asked- Why did they just run planes into our buildings and kill thousands? What pain must they be enduring to commit such an egregious act? Instead of immediately using it as an excuse to go to war- to commit government sanctioned acts of terrorism upon them.
Geronimo in his time I am sure was considered a terrorist. The US for one didn't recognize our (as Native peoples) form of governance- rendering Geronimo a non-governmental agent inflicting acts of violence- which is the definition of a terrorist. So we know that in terms of the US government, Geronimo was a terrorist. What we also know as Native Peoples is that he was a honored leader. A man that fought against occupation: the loss of our land and culture. He did not consider women and children as justifiable targets. He also did not inflict acts of violence to inspire terror but rather to battle against the war the US was waging on our people. He was driven to violent acts, because of all the violence we were facing as a people, he himself lost his entire family to this violence. Geronimo was a fierce and brilliant warrior, who will forever be honored because of the sacrifices he made for his people.
To me there are similarities in the circumstances that drove these men to war. Both felt the US Government was killing their people (metaphorically or physically or both). That is about where the similarity ends, but yet still the US Government and Military would utter their names as if they were comparable. Clearly the US still thinks that we as Native people's were/are terrorists. This is where I want to become critical of our participation in this war, in this celebration of a man's death, a despicable man yes, but a man whose people have suffered at the hands of our government and and a people whose hatred of the US and anger is justified- not in killing thousands of innocents but justified anger nonetheless.
In the end, my question for my people and all oppressed peoples is: If the US government still sees us as terrorists, why do we ally ourselves with them? It seems to me we have more in common with other oppressed peoples than with the US government and its military complex. I challenge us all to challenge wars in our names, against people whom we may have more in common with than the people we share this country with. The US government declares war on brown, yellow, black, red, working class, women, and disabled everyday, this war has let it terrorize people of the Muslim faith as well. Although I do not endorse acts of violence as a means of combating this war against us. I do endorse critical thought, that expands beyond our own borders. Is it so hard to understand that what oppresses us, may oppress others? That our government is currently and has been for a long time responsible for the decimation of cultures all across the world? That they do it in our name? That they convince us that it is right. So much so that we celebrate the death of another human, and the continuation of violence (the exact opposite of a solution) as if our sports team won?
It is a sad predicament we live in.
Monday, April 25, 2011
If you want something real, don't give it up to early.
This sentence shakes me to my core. I hear it all the time, and it offends me all the time. The problem with the ism's racism, sexism, able bodiedism, is that they take away people's humanity. They take away the ability for people to be who they are rather than be ruled by some set of assumptions made about them, limiting them because of the body they were born into. This rant in particular though is about heterosexual relationships, and gender roles.
I actually agree, if you want a healthy relationship, neither party should probably give it up to early. Sex early on, often creates a false sense of closeness and intimacy that hasn't actually been created as two humans connecting but rather from two bodies connecting in the most intimate of ways. Then of course there is conflict resolution, the ability to communicate through a conflict rather than resorting to sex to clear up the air, is always good for a healthy relationship.
What i take issue with are the following:
1. Sex early signals the intent of having a fling.
2. Sex early on implies the woman is loose, or not to be respected- which is why the relationship is not serious.
3. The woman is responsible for holding out- because a man can't hold such responsibility.
Intent of having a fling
I'm sorry any one ever heard of communication? Sex early on really implies nothing without communication. There are a million possibilities that could lead to early on sex that have nothing to do with a fling. One such possibility is that the man is teasing the girl so much she can't resist. Giving into physical temptation may imply one is weak at resisting physical temptation but by no means implies that they do not want a committed and caring relationship. Communication would be the key hear- if either party is just interested in having a fling they should communicate that to the other person- and let them agree or not to such an arrangement.
She's loose, undeserving of respect
For lack of a better word, this is some bullshit. The women in the US fought for sexual liberation- only to create a more rampant use of the word slut, and essentially disrespect to be more acceptable. I can't walk down the street without some man telling me what he wants to do to me. Young girls seek affirmation on their beauty and worth through sex, only to find it gone after the act. Then they enter a relationship, with someone they think is cute and sweet. And he wants sex almost immediately, and if she says yes she is a slut. But one has to ask, why did you ask for sex then? In an attempt to disrespect another human being? Or it begs to reinforce that men do not respect women. In general I believe that respect has to be earned, but only character can earn respect. Response to physical stimuli is not what creates a respected human. But in cultures across the world, this special rule is applied to women alone, and it should be fought against. My character, my worth, are not defined by who i let pleasure me.
A man can't hold out
I'm sorry what? This implies that women do not enjoy nor fantasize about sex as much as men do. It reinforces this idea that men cannot control themselves, that somehow when i comes to sex they cannot be held accountable. This mentality is prevalent throughout our society- from blame the victim rape cases to she must be a slut look at the way she dresses. A man shouldn't ask for something if it is going to change his feelings about someone- at least not without communicating it first. And i'm sick of this, we have to hold out because the man can't bullshit. A relationship whether it be a fling or something serious, does not have to be held together by the woman.
In the end these in my mind are serious societal problems, and we cannot solve them until we stand up against it and vocalize what is wrong.
I actually agree, if you want a healthy relationship, neither party should probably give it up to early. Sex early on, often creates a false sense of closeness and intimacy that hasn't actually been created as two humans connecting but rather from two bodies connecting in the most intimate of ways. Then of course there is conflict resolution, the ability to communicate through a conflict rather than resorting to sex to clear up the air, is always good for a healthy relationship.
What i take issue with are the following:
1. Sex early signals the intent of having a fling.
2. Sex early on implies the woman is loose, or not to be respected- which is why the relationship is not serious.
3. The woman is responsible for holding out- because a man can't hold such responsibility.
Intent of having a fling
I'm sorry any one ever heard of communication? Sex early on really implies nothing without communication. There are a million possibilities that could lead to early on sex that have nothing to do with a fling. One such possibility is that the man is teasing the girl so much she can't resist. Giving into physical temptation may imply one is weak at resisting physical temptation but by no means implies that they do not want a committed and caring relationship. Communication would be the key hear- if either party is just interested in having a fling they should communicate that to the other person- and let them agree or not to such an arrangement.
She's loose, undeserving of respect
For lack of a better word, this is some bullshit. The women in the US fought for sexual liberation- only to create a more rampant use of the word slut, and essentially disrespect to be more acceptable. I can't walk down the street without some man telling me what he wants to do to me. Young girls seek affirmation on their beauty and worth through sex, only to find it gone after the act. Then they enter a relationship, with someone they think is cute and sweet. And he wants sex almost immediately, and if she says yes she is a slut. But one has to ask, why did you ask for sex then? In an attempt to disrespect another human being? Or it begs to reinforce that men do not respect women. In general I believe that respect has to be earned, but only character can earn respect. Response to physical stimuli is not what creates a respected human. But in cultures across the world, this special rule is applied to women alone, and it should be fought against. My character, my worth, are not defined by who i let pleasure me.
A man can't hold out
I'm sorry what? This implies that women do not enjoy nor fantasize about sex as much as men do. It reinforces this idea that men cannot control themselves, that somehow when i comes to sex they cannot be held accountable. This mentality is prevalent throughout our society- from blame the victim rape cases to she must be a slut look at the way she dresses. A man shouldn't ask for something if it is going to change his feelings about someone- at least not without communicating it first. And i'm sick of this, we have to hold out because the man can't bullshit. A relationship whether it be a fling or something serious, does not have to be held together by the woman.
In the end these in my mind are serious societal problems, and we cannot solve them until we stand up against it and vocalize what is wrong.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Waves
What does it mean to come in and out of disability?
In and out of ability?
In and out of oppression?
In and out of privilege?
I fell today. Seemingly meaningless. But to me, a fall down a flight of stairs and a skinned knee mean so much more than that, they mean a lifetime of going in and out of disability. A lifetime that will progressively get harder and harder.
I ran my third half marathon a week ago. I ran it with relative ease. One foot in front of the other, 2.5 hours on my feet, with the world slowly passing by, one breath one step at a time. I felt great, I felt well. I felt healthy.
One moment i am just like all the other able-bodied people around me, probably better abled in fact. I work out 3 hours a day. I am strong, independent, happy. I feel like a poser, when I talk about my disability. I have to explain that its only sometimes. I feel as if I can't be a disabled activist, or a spokesperson, because it is only me sometimes- and what happens anyway? I get numb, I fall down? Those aren't even real problems, I think to myself.
But every few weeks my body talks back. It tells me that it isn't going to work the way other peoples do, that it will give up on me every now and then. That I'm also not one of them, not one of the able-bodied.
And then I am at a loss. Where is my place? What is my future? Where is my support?
In and out of ability?
In and out of oppression?
In and out of privilege?
I fell today. Seemingly meaningless. But to me, a fall down a flight of stairs and a skinned knee mean so much more than that, they mean a lifetime of going in and out of disability. A lifetime that will progressively get harder and harder.
I ran my third half marathon a week ago. I ran it with relative ease. One foot in front of the other, 2.5 hours on my feet, with the world slowly passing by, one breath one step at a time. I felt great, I felt well. I felt healthy.
One moment i am just like all the other able-bodied people around me, probably better abled in fact. I work out 3 hours a day. I am strong, independent, happy. I feel like a poser, when I talk about my disability. I have to explain that its only sometimes. I feel as if I can't be a disabled activist, or a spokesperson, because it is only me sometimes- and what happens anyway? I get numb, I fall down? Those aren't even real problems, I think to myself.
But every few weeks my body talks back. It tells me that it isn't going to work the way other peoples do, that it will give up on me every now and then. That I'm also not one of them, not one of the able-bodied.
And then I am at a loss. Where is my place? What is my future? Where is my support?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)