It's that time of the year- THE HOLIDAYS™ are upon us. Store shelves laden with tinsel and snowmen figurines, strands of small lightbulbs stapled to porches and wrapped around fences, wreaths made of everything from actual fir tree limbs to pinecones to shining garland. And you want to know the biggest secret of all (read: not a secret at all)?
I love Christmas.
Specifically, I love Christmas decorations. I love dragging the fake tree out of the closet (I am, in fact, allergic to real trees), I love taking an hour to put the lights on because they must be evenly spaced, I love carefully planning the placement of each and every ornament. I love candy canes of all flavors and I love getting out my light-up snowman to put in the window.
Someday, when I am not a poor college student, I will buy everything in the holiday isle at the store. I will have five trees and so many lights that my whole house glows. Every available surface will be wrapped in various colors of garland and I will make hundreds of paper snowflakes to hang from the ceiling. I will put real snowmen all over the front yard (or fake ones, if global warming continues to ruin Christmas). I will put up these decorations in early November and take them down around Valentine's Day (probably the worst of all holidays).
The real kicker about all of this is that I am not a Christian. I quit when I was ten, which means I have technically been a not-Christian longer than I was a Christian. I don't care about the Bible, I don't care about any of the mythology. It is my understanding that Jesus wasn't even born in the winter. I have no interest in any of that.
What I do love is the joy that a decorated tree gives me. I love the memories wrapped up in my family's collection of ornaments. I love our nativity scene, not because of the Jesus part, but because I colored on some of it with crayon when I was a kid. I love hearing stories about the holidays- like the one about my great-uncle drunkenly crashing into the tree while riding a pogo stick indoors.
I love the morning of, when my sister and I get up early and then wait as long as we can before charging into my parents' room to make them get out of bed. I love watching my family members react to their gifts- one year we got my dad a ghillie suit (Google it) and a pair of Wellington boots. He proceeded to run out into the driveway while wearing said items and bellowed. It was hilarious.
So that's why I love Christmas. It isn't about religion, for me, any more than Halloween is about religion. It's important to me because it both appeals to the obsessive side of me, and to the sentimental side of me. It's about making good food, putting up flawless decorations, and enjoying my loud and crazy family.
So yes, I put up Christmas decorations before Thanksgiving. In fact, I whistle Christmas carols while I decorate. I would not have it any other way.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Pioneer Day Anniversary
Today is Pioneer Day, which marks that I have officially lived in Salt Lake City for two whole years. Two years ago today, my mom and I finished moving in all my stuff, had the cable and internet set up, and watched the (slightly racist) Pioneer Day parade.
It's been a strange trip, these last two years. My grandfather died, my mentor died, my lizard died. I swore at Mormons, I went to football games, I ate Jello. I watched cars slide down the street when it was covered in ice, and I watched a lightning-infused snowstorm. I enjoyed walking home from school on nice days, and I survived the trip home when the weather was bad.
I survived paying taxes, power outages, and the Salt Lake County DMV. I spent a lot of time in the university's anthropology department, too much time in the library, and not enough time in the gym. I made a lot of food, ate a lot of food, and managed to avoid setting my apartment on fire.
I'm not sure what I was expecting when I moved here. I picked Utah because I had friends here, and it was somewhere that wasn't where I was. I guess that's what made it a good thing- I didn't expect anything of this place. I'd been in Utah once, for the Salt Lake Olympics. I didn't know what it looked like, what living here was like. I had no set expectations.
Am I always happy here? No, of course not. You'd be hard-pressed to find someone who is always happy, regardless of where they are. But moving to Salt Lake has made me an adult, a real one, because I can cope when things are less-than-perfect. I can solve my problems for myself, and I feel like that is the biggest thing moving here has given me.
This isn't a long post, because it's easier to write witty one-liners that sum up my experiences than try to write a memoir. The summary of this, I guess, is that I've had a good two years in Salt Lake. And I have every intention of staying here.
It's been a strange trip, these last two years. My grandfather died, my mentor died, my lizard died. I swore at Mormons, I went to football games, I ate Jello. I watched cars slide down the street when it was covered in ice, and I watched a lightning-infused snowstorm. I enjoyed walking home from school on nice days, and I survived the trip home when the weather was bad.
I survived paying taxes, power outages, and the Salt Lake County DMV. I spent a lot of time in the university's anthropology department, too much time in the library, and not enough time in the gym. I made a lot of food, ate a lot of food, and managed to avoid setting my apartment on fire.
I'm not sure what I was expecting when I moved here. I picked Utah because I had friends here, and it was somewhere that wasn't where I was. I guess that's what made it a good thing- I didn't expect anything of this place. I'd been in Utah once, for the Salt Lake Olympics. I didn't know what it looked like, what living here was like. I had no set expectations.
Am I always happy here? No, of course not. You'd be hard-pressed to find someone who is always happy, regardless of where they are. But moving to Salt Lake has made me an adult, a real one, because I can cope when things are less-than-perfect. I can solve my problems for myself, and I feel like that is the biggest thing moving here has given me.
This isn't a long post, because it's easier to write witty one-liners that sum up my experiences than try to write a memoir. The summary of this, I guess, is that I've had a good two years in Salt Lake. And I have every intention of staying here.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
If Preparedness is Next to Godliness, These People are Holy.
So, let's talk a little bit about everyone's favorite subject, Mormons. I do adore them most days, in the way I am entertained by the Smurfs- there is nothing remotely attractive about being a Smurf, but it's a lifestyle I don't understand and find fascinating. I also talk a lot of trash about Mormons, because they have quite a few rules that are just not for me (particularly the ones about swearing and drinking).
But occasionally, I do need to give them credit. Underneath all of the capped sleeves and boring suits, these are people who do seem to legitimately care about their community, and this is why Utah will be a great place to live when the zombie apocalypse finally hits. That, or it will be a theocratic hell. I'm guessing it's a combination of those two.
Like I was saying, they do things that impress me sometimes, and right now would be one of those times. See, I don't know if you pay much attention to what goes on in the Wild West, but it is dry. I mean, goddamned dry. Drier than Temple Square on a Sunday. There are currently wildfires everywhere in this state that grow by the thousands of acres. Not nearly as bad as Colorado, but if the whole hot, dry, windy thing continues, we're going to look remarkably like our neighboring state.
Right now, it is 100 degrees (Fahrenheit) with wind speeds at around 30 miles per hour. These are perfect conditions if you are a wildfire, and the worst conditions if you are a living being.
I am telling you all of this as a bit of a prologue to the main story. See, the closest fire to Salt Lake shot from being around 800 acres on Friday morning to 4,000 Friday night. This growth was so alarming that the police evacuated multiple neighborhoods in the towns of Eagle Mountain and Saratoga Springs (displacing about 9,000 people Friday night). What is incredible to me is that these people all took it in stride. The firefighters actually received so much food from volunteers that they started turning away donations. They had a shelter at one of the high schools up and running, plus multiple places that were housing animals free of charge. The families evacuated left their homes with almost no fuss, and they all had 72 hour kits ready for when they left (Google it if you've never heard the phrase "72 hour kit" before).
This is what impresses me about Mormon culture: they are prepared for anything. For all their high and mighty bullshit, they will drop everything and lend a hand when disaster strikes. I suppose a part of it is that they're waiting for the apocalypse. I mean, the "Latter Days" part of Latter-Day Saints is referring to waiting for the Savior (typed "savor" the first time, lololol) to return and go all Revelations on our asses, right? Part of their dogma is that they legitimately believe that's coming any day now, that we're at the end of days, and if we don't have our survival supplies ready at the door, Baby Jesus will cry. (Okay, made up the last bit).
Like those Daily Bread products (Again, Google is the friend of anyone unfamiliar with these strange Mormon ways). Daily Bread offers MREs that are supposed to be good for twenty-five years! Seriously! Can you imagine buying products that are going to sit in your basement for the next quarter-century, all so when the zombies show up you can still have your freeze-dried chicken fajitas? Well, the Mormons can imagine doing just such a thing, because Daily Bread ads are all over here.
This is how they live their lives- a low dose of paranoia every day. They have guns, they have indestructible food, they have survival kits ready to go in the hall closets, they have water purifiers in the trunks of their cars. On the one hand, I love it; on any given day, I would rather be fighting off the zombie hordes during an apocalypse than doing homework. On the other hand, though, it creeps me out a little. These are people who live in a constant state of low-grade fear.
Let's be honest here, though. When you live in a place like Utah, wildfires, avalanches, and earthquakes are all very real possibilities. We could potentially have the power go out for weeks because it is ten degrees outside and everything is frozen. It's kind of an extreme place. So if a fire breaks out tomorrow and swoops down through the Avenues towards my apartment, I'm glad that there are people around me waiting with water bottles and a sincere desire to help.
But occasionally, I do need to give them credit. Underneath all of the capped sleeves and boring suits, these are people who do seem to legitimately care about their community, and this is why Utah will be a great place to live when the zombie apocalypse finally hits. That, or it will be a theocratic hell. I'm guessing it's a combination of those two.
Like I was saying, they do things that impress me sometimes, and right now would be one of those times. See, I don't know if you pay much attention to what goes on in the Wild West, but it is dry. I mean, goddamned dry. Drier than Temple Square on a Sunday. There are currently wildfires everywhere in this state that grow by the thousands of acres. Not nearly as bad as Colorado, but if the whole hot, dry, windy thing continues, we're going to look remarkably like our neighboring state.
Right now, it is 100 degrees (Fahrenheit) with wind speeds at around 30 miles per hour. These are perfect conditions if you are a wildfire, and the worst conditions if you are a living being.
I am telling you all of this as a bit of a prologue to the main story. See, the closest fire to Salt Lake shot from being around 800 acres on Friday morning to 4,000 Friday night. This growth was so alarming that the police evacuated multiple neighborhoods in the towns of Eagle Mountain and Saratoga Springs (displacing about 9,000 people Friday night). What is incredible to me is that these people all took it in stride. The firefighters actually received so much food from volunteers that they started turning away donations. They had a shelter at one of the high schools up and running, plus multiple places that were housing animals free of charge. The families evacuated left their homes with almost no fuss, and they all had 72 hour kits ready for when they left (Google it if you've never heard the phrase "72 hour kit" before).
This is what impresses me about Mormon culture: they are prepared for anything. For all their high and mighty bullshit, they will drop everything and lend a hand when disaster strikes. I suppose a part of it is that they're waiting for the apocalypse. I mean, the "Latter Days" part of Latter-Day Saints is referring to waiting for the Savior (typed "savor" the first time, lololol) to return and go all Revelations on our asses, right? Part of their dogma is that they legitimately believe that's coming any day now, that we're at the end of days, and if we don't have our survival supplies ready at the door, Baby Jesus will cry. (Okay, made up the last bit).
Like those Daily Bread products (Again, Google is the friend of anyone unfamiliar with these strange Mormon ways). Daily Bread offers MREs that are supposed to be good for twenty-five years! Seriously! Can you imagine buying products that are going to sit in your basement for the next quarter-century, all so when the zombies show up you can still have your freeze-dried chicken fajitas? Well, the Mormons can imagine doing just such a thing, because Daily Bread ads are all over here.
This is how they live their lives- a low dose of paranoia every day. They have guns, they have indestructible food, they have survival kits ready to go in the hall closets, they have water purifiers in the trunks of their cars. On the one hand, I love it; on any given day, I would rather be fighting off the zombie hordes during an apocalypse than doing homework. On the other hand, though, it creeps me out a little. These are people who live in a constant state of low-grade fear.
Let's be honest here, though. When you live in a place like Utah, wildfires, avalanches, and earthquakes are all very real possibilities. We could potentially have the power go out for weeks because it is ten degrees outside and everything is frozen. It's kind of an extreme place. So if a fire breaks out tomorrow and swoops down through the Avenues towards my apartment, I'm glad that there are people around me waiting with water bottles and a sincere desire to help.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Why "Caucasian" is Discriminatory
This is a bit off-topic, but it's something that truly bugs me. Unfortunately, this is a concept so deeply embedded in our current culture that most do not consider these terms used to describe "race" beyond a superficial level.
First, I use quotations for the term "race" because I am a human biologist and, strictly speaking, there are no races in the human species. The biological term "race" denotes a subset of a particular species that is recognizable and distinct. Because no groups of humans meet these criteria, there are no races within Homo sapiens. Don't get me wrong, this is not an attempt at race denial or discrimination based on our cultural concepts of race. This is simply an attempt to clarify on a technical level, and as such, I'll be using "ethnicity" instead of "race," as ethnicity is a cultural construct used to divide populations. The continued use of the word "race" only serves as a continued white attempt to differentiate between white people and people of another demographic. Therefore, I reject the word and substitute my own.
Anyway, this centers on the term "Caucasian," which, ironically, Google insists I capitalize. If you are white, I'm sure you're familiar with the term. Even if you're not white, you still probably hear the term constantly. In American culture, we have historically struggled with finding terms to describe ethnicity in ways that are not offensive to the groups being described. I don't need to go into that history, you can look it up yourself if you truly care to do so.
Of all the terms now seen as offensive, though, "Caucasian" has survived. Such a strange term, isn't it? I mean, when we think of people with European heritage, we generally do not think of the Caucasus (or Caucas) Mountains, which form a geographical border between Europe and Asia (think Russia). Even those ethnicities like Italian or Spanish were not regarded as "white" until relatively recently. So why would we refer to those of Anglo-Saxon heritage as being from the Caucasus Mountains?
It's a fascinating story, and you can look it up for yourself if you want better detail, but the basic story is this: around the end of the eighteenth century, explorers uncovered human remains in the Caucasus Mountains. A skull found in these remains was regarded as being a "perfect" skull, a template, if you will, of what good, beautiful European people should look like. It was proposed that these remains represented the ancestors of all European people, simply because it was a subjectively-attractive skull. This is especially fascinating considering we hardly possess adequate technology for facial reproduction in this modern age. The fact that these remains were used as some kind of type example without any ability to know what the living human looked like stands as proof that this was about pure discrimination. The term "Caucasian," as it is used in terms of ethnicity in our culture, comes straight out of a desire to justify the division between Europe and the rest of the world.
So, while we have moved away from using terms used to describe various ethnicities that are seen as overtly discriminatory, we are still frequently using a term that originates in white history's continued attempt to prove there is a difference, and more importantly, there is a superior ethnicity. As a human biologist, I'm here to tell you that's a giant crock of shit. And that's a scientific term, you can quote me, if you like. My point here is that, while some apologists may prefer more specific terms like "Irish-American" or "English-American," the proper term for describing those of European heritage is either "European-American," or, for efficiency's sake, "white." It's not that hard, and if you're really that attached to such an outdated term as "Caucasian," you need to get a life.
First, I use quotations for the term "race" because I am a human biologist and, strictly speaking, there are no races in the human species. The biological term "race" denotes a subset of a particular species that is recognizable and distinct. Because no groups of humans meet these criteria, there are no races within Homo sapiens. Don't get me wrong, this is not an attempt at race denial or discrimination based on our cultural concepts of race. This is simply an attempt to clarify on a technical level, and as such, I'll be using "ethnicity" instead of "race," as ethnicity is a cultural construct used to divide populations. The continued use of the word "race" only serves as a continued white attempt to differentiate between white people and people of another demographic. Therefore, I reject the word and substitute my own.
Anyway, this centers on the term "Caucasian," which, ironically, Google insists I capitalize. If you are white, I'm sure you're familiar with the term. Even if you're not white, you still probably hear the term constantly. In American culture, we have historically struggled with finding terms to describe ethnicity in ways that are not offensive to the groups being described. I don't need to go into that history, you can look it up yourself if you truly care to do so.
Of all the terms now seen as offensive, though, "Caucasian" has survived. Such a strange term, isn't it? I mean, when we think of people with European heritage, we generally do not think of the Caucasus (or Caucas) Mountains, which form a geographical border between Europe and Asia (think Russia). Even those ethnicities like Italian or Spanish were not regarded as "white" until relatively recently. So why would we refer to those of Anglo-Saxon heritage as being from the Caucasus Mountains?
It's a fascinating story, and you can look it up for yourself if you want better detail, but the basic story is this: around the end of the eighteenth century, explorers uncovered human remains in the Caucasus Mountains. A skull found in these remains was regarded as being a "perfect" skull, a template, if you will, of what good, beautiful European people should look like. It was proposed that these remains represented the ancestors of all European people, simply because it was a subjectively-attractive skull. This is especially fascinating considering we hardly possess adequate technology for facial reproduction in this modern age. The fact that these remains were used as some kind of type example without any ability to know what the living human looked like stands as proof that this was about pure discrimination. The term "Caucasian," as it is used in terms of ethnicity in our culture, comes straight out of a desire to justify the division between Europe and the rest of the world.
So, while we have moved away from using terms used to describe various ethnicities that are seen as overtly discriminatory, we are still frequently using a term that originates in white history's continued attempt to prove there is a difference, and more importantly, there is a superior ethnicity. As a human biologist, I'm here to tell you that's a giant crock of shit. And that's a scientific term, you can quote me, if you like. My point here is that, while some apologists may prefer more specific terms like "Irish-American" or "English-American," the proper term for describing those of European heritage is either "European-American," or, for efficiency's sake, "white." It's not that hard, and if you're really that attached to such an outdated term as "Caucasian," you need to get a life.
Friday, April 20, 2012
Oh, Activism
I guess it's been a bit, since the whole Blogger format's got me feeling a little disoriented. That's okay, because there is licorice, Jones Soda, and I am listening to Green Day for the first time in five years (I admit I'd forgotten about them, but that's what iTunes is for, right?)
So it's 4/20, and feel free to laugh at the implied marijuana joke. Alright, that's enough, thank you. It also is the "Day of Action" for those silly enough to fall for the whole Kony 2012 thing. So let us talk about activism and marketing, two subjects that go skipping down the lane of consciousness hand-in-hand.
Kony 2012 is a movement, for those of you thus far unexposed, that places at the focus Joseph Kony, a dictator of times since passed that was notorious for coercing and threatening children into joining his militia in Uganda. Of course, he is now a mostly-powerless old man who has since fled to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (a country so ironically named that it rivals The Peoples' Republic of China in ridiculousness) and has done little in the last ten years. Yes, to be fair, he is still a local threat and a war criminal. Given this, a campaign of the Kony 2012's magnitude is a tad overblown, would you not say?
Ah, but this is the magic that is marketing in activism. Throw it a little money, and you can turn everything from aging former terrorists to bugs in your berry frappe into a political movement. It is truly fascinating, how Adam Smith's invisible hand burrows into everything. You see, the base of the fervor behind this is a well-paid marketing strategy.
Invisible Children, the agency behind the Kony 2012 movement, has spent more money on their marketing strategy than they have on the actual cause- after reporting almost $14 million for 2011, they've spent about $3 million on programs in Africa and almost $4 million on film-making and presentations. (The USA Today article cites that they did not spend $6.5 million- http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-17/kony-2012-invisible-children/54362478/1) Obviously, you're going to do a fair job of creating enthusiasm with that kind of money, even when the issue is considered by many to be past its prime. I liken it a bit to protesting the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein and the Ba'ath Party (who doesn't love a good bath party every now and then?) in 2012, even when Saddam's been dead for almost a decade.
Look, there's nothing wrong with getting teenagers involved in activism. I did a fair amount of activism work when I was in high school. I aspire to work for non-profits as a career (as you can see, my tuition money's been money well-spent). I love activism and I love seeing people get involved in something, but there are other causes out there that could really use this kind of publicity. I'm not trying to tell anyone what causes to support here, but I'm trying to tell people to pick and choose. I wish the people caught up in the Kony 2012 thing would spend some time and examine the issue. Examine the videos with a critical eye. Why, exactly, would any humanitarian activism request that you commit misdemeanors in order to promote the cause? Why would they demand that you use their "kits" in order to raise awareness? Why would they rely heavily on outdated information to create a relevant movement?
I've had to work pretty hard to understand the causes I get behind, and there have been plenty of causes I either abandon after further examination or pick up after further examination. If you have thoroughly examined the Kony 2012 movement, looked at how the agency spends money, read about the conflict in Central Africa, and you still support it, then I have no problem with you. However, if you are willing to base support for a campaign solely on a video on YouTube, I have nothing to say to you.
So it's 4/20, and feel free to laugh at the implied marijuana joke. Alright, that's enough, thank you. It also is the "Day of Action" for those silly enough to fall for the whole Kony 2012 thing. So let us talk about activism and marketing, two subjects that go skipping down the lane of consciousness hand-in-hand.
Kony 2012 is a movement, for those of you thus far unexposed, that places at the focus Joseph Kony, a dictator of times since passed that was notorious for coercing and threatening children into joining his militia in Uganda. Of course, he is now a mostly-powerless old man who has since fled to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (a country so ironically named that it rivals The Peoples' Republic of China in ridiculousness) and has done little in the last ten years. Yes, to be fair, he is still a local threat and a war criminal. Given this, a campaign of the Kony 2012's magnitude is a tad overblown, would you not say?
Ah, but this is the magic that is marketing in activism. Throw it a little money, and you can turn everything from aging former terrorists to bugs in your berry frappe into a political movement. It is truly fascinating, how Adam Smith's invisible hand burrows into everything. You see, the base of the fervor behind this is a well-paid marketing strategy.
Invisible Children, the agency behind the Kony 2012 movement, has spent more money on their marketing strategy than they have on the actual cause- after reporting almost $14 million for 2011, they've spent about $3 million on programs in Africa and almost $4 million on film-making and presentations. (The USA Today article cites that they did not spend $6.5 million- http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-17/kony-2012-invisible-children/54362478/1) Obviously, you're going to do a fair job of creating enthusiasm with that kind of money, even when the issue is considered by many to be past its prime. I liken it a bit to protesting the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein and the Ba'ath Party (who doesn't love a good bath party every now and then?) in 2012, even when Saddam's been dead for almost a decade.
Look, there's nothing wrong with getting teenagers involved in activism. I did a fair amount of activism work when I was in high school. I aspire to work for non-profits as a career (as you can see, my tuition money's been money well-spent). I love activism and I love seeing people get involved in something, but there are other causes out there that could really use this kind of publicity. I'm not trying to tell anyone what causes to support here, but I'm trying to tell people to pick and choose. I wish the people caught up in the Kony 2012 thing would spend some time and examine the issue. Examine the videos with a critical eye. Why, exactly, would any humanitarian activism request that you commit misdemeanors in order to promote the cause? Why would they demand that you use their "kits" in order to raise awareness? Why would they rely heavily on outdated information to create a relevant movement?
I've had to work pretty hard to understand the causes I get behind, and there have been plenty of causes I either abandon after further examination or pick up after further examination. If you have thoroughly examined the Kony 2012 movement, looked at how the agency spends money, read about the conflict in Central Africa, and you still support it, then I have no problem with you. However, if you are willing to base support for a campaign solely on a video on YouTube, I have nothing to say to you.
Friday, March 2, 2012
It Makes Me So Mad.
This contraception debate really, truly makes me want to cry.
Normally, I can brush this shit off at some point. But the things being said are so personally offensive that I can hardly even talk about it without screaming. I just don't even know what to say about it all anymore. I mean, it is horrifying and severely disappointing to find out that the people elected to represent the citizens of America do not even think I am a person who is capable of human functions, such as thought. It is so mentally destructive to hear these fucks claim that employers shouldn't have to pay for my healthcare if they don't think I deserve it. That is not how this works. People who have guaranteed health insurance and access to healthcare (representatives) should not be able to pass laws that say others are not deserving of healthcare simply because they are women. It is clear to me now that these are people who not only do not care about me, but actually want to do me harm. These are people who think I do not deserve to be treated like a human being. These are people (mostly men, unfortunately) who are so determined to reinforce the barriers separating people like me from gaining power that they will actually jeopardize my health.
It disgusts me. It makes my skin crawl. It fills me with so much rage that I want to take a sledgehammer and start breaking things.
This last week, in the ongoing war over my uterus, I've been called a sex-addicted slut simply for being on birth control. (Thanks Rush.) I wish I could simply believe that people who say things like this are ignorant, that they don't understand the myriad of reasons a woman might take hormonal birth control. But I cannot believe that. People in these positions of power have, undoubtedly, had this pointed out to them. The truth is that they don't care. They don't care that hormonal birth control is used to treat severe menstrual symptoms, or ovarian cysts, or hormonal imbalances. That does not matter to people like Rush Limbaugh, because people like him do not care about women. They don't care that without legalized abortion, women die. They don't care that doctors cannot treat a woman who is bleeding to death, because it would abort the fetus. None of this matters to them, because people like this see women as expendable less-than-human beings.
There is no way to clue in people like this. They are so far beyond help that there are not words in the English language that will change their minds. Women, in their minds, will never be capable of being as smart, or as talented, or as strong, as they are. They do not view people like me as equals, or even as rivals- they view us as no better than children. They see us as ignorant lesser beings who should not be given any kind of power.
This is not a characteristic of all men, and it infuriates me when people imply that this is somehow a trait that all men share. It is not. For one, there are (inexplicably) women who argue that we are not as capable as men. More importantly, there are men in this world who are just as infuriated as I am. I've been fortunate to have so many male peers who see me as an equal. It is reassuring to know that there are men out there who believe I should have every right to do whatever I want with my body.
Because the truth is that it is none of anyone's business, what I am doing with my uterus, or my breasts, or my earlobes. It should not matter whether I take birth control because I like sex or because I have a hormonal imbalance. It is between me and my health care provider, and no one else. I don't ask to know why anyone else takes a prescription drug, and I don't know why my prescription should be anyone else's business. The reason that I deserve to have my prescription paid for by my health insurance is because that is what health insurance is for. It is there to assist us with medical costs. It helps pay for insulin, and painkillers, and power scooters, so why should my medical needs be excluded? It would be one thing to argue we should do away with health insurance, and that is a different discussion for a different time. However, it is basic discrimination to argue that only my medical needs should not be covered, simply because some people personally do not like it. I personally do not like people who get free power scooters, and yet I see no "conscience" argument against providing for them. This is not about your conscience. Your conscience has no fucking business in my medical decisions. If you want to pretend the space beneath my underwear is nondescript and looks like a Barbie-crotch, fine. I don't care. But wanting me to pretend that about myself? No. Fuck no. I'm not interested in this religious guilt-tripping, because I have nothing to feel guilty for. I have not violated any of my own ideals. So why exactly should I be penalized according to beliefs I do not believe in?
Normally, I can brush this shit off at some point. But the things being said are so personally offensive that I can hardly even talk about it without screaming. I just don't even know what to say about it all anymore. I mean, it is horrifying and severely disappointing to find out that the people elected to represent the citizens of America do not even think I am a person who is capable of human functions, such as thought. It is so mentally destructive to hear these fucks claim that employers shouldn't have to pay for my healthcare if they don't think I deserve it. That is not how this works. People who have guaranteed health insurance and access to healthcare (representatives) should not be able to pass laws that say others are not deserving of healthcare simply because they are women. It is clear to me now that these are people who not only do not care about me, but actually want to do me harm. These are people who think I do not deserve to be treated like a human being. These are people (mostly men, unfortunately) who are so determined to reinforce the barriers separating people like me from gaining power that they will actually jeopardize my health.
It disgusts me. It makes my skin crawl. It fills me with so much rage that I want to take a sledgehammer and start breaking things.
This last week, in the ongoing war over my uterus, I've been called a sex-addicted slut simply for being on birth control. (Thanks Rush.) I wish I could simply believe that people who say things like this are ignorant, that they don't understand the myriad of reasons a woman might take hormonal birth control. But I cannot believe that. People in these positions of power have, undoubtedly, had this pointed out to them. The truth is that they don't care. They don't care that hormonal birth control is used to treat severe menstrual symptoms, or ovarian cysts, or hormonal imbalances. That does not matter to people like Rush Limbaugh, because people like him do not care about women. They don't care that without legalized abortion, women die. They don't care that doctors cannot treat a woman who is bleeding to death, because it would abort the fetus. None of this matters to them, because people like this see women as expendable less-than-human beings.
There is no way to clue in people like this. They are so far beyond help that there are not words in the English language that will change their minds. Women, in their minds, will never be capable of being as smart, or as talented, or as strong, as they are. They do not view people like me as equals, or even as rivals- they view us as no better than children. They see us as ignorant lesser beings who should not be given any kind of power.
This is not a characteristic of all men, and it infuriates me when people imply that this is somehow a trait that all men share. It is not. For one, there are (inexplicably) women who argue that we are not as capable as men. More importantly, there are men in this world who are just as infuriated as I am. I've been fortunate to have so many male peers who see me as an equal. It is reassuring to know that there are men out there who believe I should have every right to do whatever I want with my body.
Because the truth is that it is none of anyone's business, what I am doing with my uterus, or my breasts, or my earlobes. It should not matter whether I take birth control because I like sex or because I have a hormonal imbalance. It is between me and my health care provider, and no one else. I don't ask to know why anyone else takes a prescription drug, and I don't know why my prescription should be anyone else's business. The reason that I deserve to have my prescription paid for by my health insurance is because that is what health insurance is for. It is there to assist us with medical costs. It helps pay for insulin, and painkillers, and power scooters, so why should my medical needs be excluded? It would be one thing to argue we should do away with health insurance, and that is a different discussion for a different time. However, it is basic discrimination to argue that only my medical needs should not be covered, simply because some people personally do not like it. I personally do not like people who get free power scooters, and yet I see no "conscience" argument against providing for them. This is not about your conscience. Your conscience has no fucking business in my medical decisions. If you want to pretend the space beneath my underwear is nondescript and looks like a Barbie-crotch, fine. I don't care. But wanting me to pretend that about myself? No. Fuck no. I'm not interested in this religious guilt-tripping, because I have nothing to feel guilty for. I have not violated any of my own ideals. So why exactly should I be penalized according to beliefs I do not believe in?
Thursday, February 16, 2012
I Should Put a Bayer Aspirin Where? Oh, For Fuck's Sake.
You. You there. You, wearing the business suit and boring tie. The one carrying the Bible around and talking about Baby Jesus. Yes, I am talking to you.
What makes you think you have any right to talk about what I do with my uterus? That is disgusting. You don't even know me. You don't know my motives for doing what I do. Why would you think you're a better authority on my genitalia than I am?
Do not talk about my vagina, my uterus, or my ovaries. Do not even think about them. That is beyond revolting. You should be arrested for sexual harassment. Why the hell would you think it's okay to discuss my body parts? Why would you think it's okay for you to make medical decisions for me?
And don't try to tell me that it's because you care about potential life. That is bullshit and you know it. You don't care about life. If you did, we wouldn't still be involved in a major war. We wouldn't have supporters of the death penalty. We'd have adequate medical care for everyone and paid-for childcare programs. That's what it would look like if you cared about life, alright? This isn't about "protecting life." This is about control. This is about shaming women who have, for one reason or another, gotten pregnant. This is about keeping the glass ceiling firmly in place.
And don't you dare try to tell me that some of your best friends are women. I don't care. Half of the world's population has ovaries, so chances are pretty damned good you're acquainted with a few card-carrying vagina-owners.
Do not try to tell me that your mother thought about aborting you. You were not "you" at that point, and obviously she decided to keep you. She decided to give up almost a year of her life to be an incubator of sorts. You were a parasite; I know, it's hard to think about. You leeched your mother's health from her. You made her sick, you compromised her immune system, and you fucked with her social life. And she made the decision to do all of that, which resulted in your existence. You should be grateful for your mother, and how dare you try to claim that other women should be forced to give up all of that. That is unconstitutional, and that is inhuman.
And don't you fucking tell me that it's only nine months. Are you willing to be held hostage and potentially jeopardize your life for nine months? Are you willing to pay the expenses involved in a healthy pregnancy? It's nine months that will change the course of her life forever. She might miss school. She might miss the opportunity to excel in her career. She might miss the opportunity to earn money that will make the difference between having a home and being on the street. She might suffer social stigma. She might suffer mental damage from the experience and never be the same person.
But you don't care about any of that, because you do not care about women. You do not care about maintaining access to reliable healthcare for women. You do not care that places like Planned Parenthood are often the only healthcare providers available to women. You do not care that the chances of dying during an abortion were drastically reduced when abortion was legalized. This is not about trying to help the lives of women facing serious medical decisions; this is about maintaining patriarchal dominance.
If you are morally against birth control or abortion, that's fine. I don't care. I don't care if your religion states you have to slather yourself in strawberry preserves once a month to maintain the holy spirit. That's your business. But the moment you claim that my access to any medical service should be altered because you have a morality problem, I care. Whether or not I use birth control or get an abortion is between me and my doctor, not between me and the Catholic Church, or me and the Republican Party. It is no one's goddamned business but mine. You trying to make it your business makes me want to destroy everything within reach.
You know what would be a more worthwhile debate? The national debate. Legalizing marijuana. Banning cell phone use while driving. In fact, there are all kinds of topics that are worthwhile. But trying to take rights away from women because your celibate priest thinks sex is icky? Go fuck yourselves.
It shocks me that there are people who think they have any right at all to discuss what I am allowed to do with my uterus. I don't try to pass legislation that controls their medical options. I'm not interested in any law that limits the rights of individuals. I have no problem with those who are against abortions, nor do I have a problem with anyone who morally objects to anything else. The moment that objection goes so far as to limit my rights, when I do not share those moral objections, I will have a problem. As long as I am not harming anyone else, I should be free to do as I like. I don't use hormonal birth control because I like to have sex with strangers, I do it because I have a hormonal imbalance and it makes me functional. So the notion that some fuckhead named Rick Santorum or Foster Freiss thinks I don't deserve access to birth control because it will enable me to be a whore makes me SO MAD I cannot even express it in words. I do not hate men, and I would never generalize this about the entirety of the male population, but men who think they have any right to discuss my medical decisions should really just go shut the fuck up.
What makes you think you have any right to talk about what I do with my uterus? That is disgusting. You don't even know me. You don't know my motives for doing what I do. Why would you think you're a better authority on my genitalia than I am?
Do not talk about my vagina, my uterus, or my ovaries. Do not even think about them. That is beyond revolting. You should be arrested for sexual harassment. Why the hell would you think it's okay to discuss my body parts? Why would you think it's okay for you to make medical decisions for me?
And don't try to tell me that it's because you care about potential life. That is bullshit and you know it. You don't care about life. If you did, we wouldn't still be involved in a major war. We wouldn't have supporters of the death penalty. We'd have adequate medical care for everyone and paid-for childcare programs. That's what it would look like if you cared about life, alright? This isn't about "protecting life." This is about control. This is about shaming women who have, for one reason or another, gotten pregnant. This is about keeping the glass ceiling firmly in place.
And don't you dare try to tell me that some of your best friends are women. I don't care. Half of the world's population has ovaries, so chances are pretty damned good you're acquainted with a few card-carrying vagina-owners.
Do not try to tell me that your mother thought about aborting you. You were not "you" at that point, and obviously she decided to keep you. She decided to give up almost a year of her life to be an incubator of sorts. You were a parasite; I know, it's hard to think about. You leeched your mother's health from her. You made her sick, you compromised her immune system, and you fucked with her social life. And she made the decision to do all of that, which resulted in your existence. You should be grateful for your mother, and how dare you try to claim that other women should be forced to give up all of that. That is unconstitutional, and that is inhuman.
And don't you fucking tell me that it's only nine months. Are you willing to be held hostage and potentially jeopardize your life for nine months? Are you willing to pay the expenses involved in a healthy pregnancy? It's nine months that will change the course of her life forever. She might miss school. She might miss the opportunity to excel in her career. She might miss the opportunity to earn money that will make the difference between having a home and being on the street. She might suffer social stigma. She might suffer mental damage from the experience and never be the same person.
But you don't care about any of that, because you do not care about women. You do not care about maintaining access to reliable healthcare for women. You do not care that places like Planned Parenthood are often the only healthcare providers available to women. You do not care that the chances of dying during an abortion were drastically reduced when abortion was legalized. This is not about trying to help the lives of women facing serious medical decisions; this is about maintaining patriarchal dominance.
If you are morally against birth control or abortion, that's fine. I don't care. I don't care if your religion states you have to slather yourself in strawberry preserves once a month to maintain the holy spirit. That's your business. But the moment you claim that my access to any medical service should be altered because you have a morality problem, I care. Whether or not I use birth control or get an abortion is between me and my doctor, not between me and the Catholic Church, or me and the Republican Party. It is no one's goddamned business but mine. You trying to make it your business makes me want to destroy everything within reach.
You know what would be a more worthwhile debate? The national debate. Legalizing marijuana. Banning cell phone use while driving. In fact, there are all kinds of topics that are worthwhile. But trying to take rights away from women because your celibate priest thinks sex is icky? Go fuck yourselves.
It shocks me that there are people who think they have any right at all to discuss what I am allowed to do with my uterus. I don't try to pass legislation that controls their medical options. I'm not interested in any law that limits the rights of individuals. I have no problem with those who are against abortions, nor do I have a problem with anyone who morally objects to anything else. The moment that objection goes so far as to limit my rights, when I do not share those moral objections, I will have a problem. As long as I am not harming anyone else, I should be free to do as I like. I don't use hormonal birth control because I like to have sex with strangers, I do it because I have a hormonal imbalance and it makes me functional. So the notion that some fuckhead named Rick Santorum or Foster Freiss thinks I don't deserve access to birth control because it will enable me to be a whore makes me SO MAD I cannot even express it in words. I do not hate men, and I would never generalize this about the entirety of the male population, but men who think they have any right to discuss my medical decisions should really just go shut the fuck up.
Monday, January 30, 2012
A Short Blast of Fury for The Today Show
God.
Just... ugh.
I watch the Today Show every morning, every damned morning for about as long as I can remember. And it has at least one segment every morning that makes me slap my forehead. I'm used to it.
But this morning, they have this fucking ridiculous segment about re-naming things associated with women so that they can be for men- "murse," "mewelry," etc.
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
God forbid men wear something that's for women, like a purse or jewelry. That would make them effeminate, and that would mean they're gay. Because, you know, the worst thing you could ever do is emulate female behavior. Everybody knows that women are weak.
What the fuck is wrong with people? Why the fuck would any woman, in her right mind, agree to do that segment? Why would anyone acknowledge that dumb waste of time? A murse? A man-purse? Since, you know, purses are for women. Oh, fuck you. Fuck you all. Fuck anyone who thinks this should be a thing. Taking something that is associated with women and changing the language "so it can be for men" makes me actually want to strangle someone. I'm really fucking glad that we're almost one hundred years from when women got the vote, but we are still changing our language so big, strong men don't have to be using the same things as dirty, dirty women.
A bunch of mouches. You know, man-douches.
Just... ugh.
I watch the Today Show every morning, every damned morning for about as long as I can remember. And it has at least one segment every morning that makes me slap my forehead. I'm used to it.
But this morning, they have this fucking ridiculous segment about re-naming things associated with women so that they can be for men- "murse," "mewelry," etc.
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
God forbid men wear something that's for women, like a purse or jewelry. That would make them effeminate, and that would mean they're gay. Because, you know, the worst thing you could ever do is emulate female behavior. Everybody knows that women are weak.
What the fuck is wrong with people? Why the fuck would any woman, in her right mind, agree to do that segment? Why would anyone acknowledge that dumb waste of time? A murse? A man-purse? Since, you know, purses are for women. Oh, fuck you. Fuck you all. Fuck anyone who thinks this should be a thing. Taking something that is associated with women and changing the language "so it can be for men" makes me actually want to strangle someone. I'm really fucking glad that we're almost one hundred years from when women got the vote, but we are still changing our language so big, strong men don't have to be using the same things as dirty, dirty women.
A bunch of mouches. You know, man-douches.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Primaries Make Me Believe the End is Near
Well, there is another presidential debate on the tube, and all I have to say about that is Jay-sus Christ (would not be amused).
I mean, seriously. I know this is on Fox News, so my standards should be appropriately lowered, but come on. This is stupid. This has reached a point of blatant, proud ignorance that I cannot even fathom. I would need to drink Drano to get to this level.
It's shocking, really, that we have an entire faction of people in this country who buy into this crap. Really? You think we should lower taxes? What kind of fucking economics class did you take, candidates? I missed the part where cutting taxes to nothing does something positive for the system. Guess what- taxes pay for things. They don't just pay for grandma's healthcare, they also pay for such abominations as roads, schools, national parks, state parks, mass transit, universities, libraries, and regulatory services that keep us good and dandy like the Food and Drug Administration or the Internal Revenue Service (yes, the IRS is a good thing). This is insane. This isn't even capitalism. (This is not Sparta, either.)
Let's talk about capitalism. You see, capitalism isn't "evil." It isn't "good," either. It's a system that looks one way on paper and another way when you add humans. Capitalism, at its core, is a system motivated by companies and economics. Is that a negative? I don't think so. Ideally, a company cares first about its customers, second about its employees, and third about its profits. Why? Because it works. See, when you care about your customers, they buy your products. When they buy your products, you have the wealth to take care of your employees. When you take care of your employees, they have the opportunity to be customers somewhere else, where they spend money and, indirectly, pay money towards the incomes of people who will be your customers. When you disregard your employees and don't take care of them, they cannot afford to spend money. If they can't do that, other people cannot earn money. If there's no surplus money in peoples' pockets, they don't spend it at your company.
This model makes sense to me. It seems to be capitalism, in that we have a constant exchange of money- a back-and-forth flow of wealth, if you will. However, this is not the model we currently use.
What we have is not capitalism. It's a kind of "corporate socialism," in that when companies fail to care for their employees and customers, those companies' leaders are assured economic survival by the government. Even in the cases of companies not directly given money to stay afloat, they still benefit from laws (or lack thereof) that address "golden parachutes" and legal liability for the failure of a company. As long as this system persists, these corporations have no real motivation to care about the welfare of their employees and the rights of their customers.
But I digress. I'm not an economics person by training, and perhaps I'm being a bit of an idealist. All I mean by this is that these candidates are incorrect when they claim to support capitalism. What they support is not capitalism, because it is an unsustainable system to promote the wealth of the few and ignore the welfare of the many. What they support is a system in which the government supports corporations and their leaders without regard to the customers and employees those corporations have scorned. That is more socialist than anything Barack Obama has done, but it isn't in the interests of the citizens. This is why I call it corporate socialism, and I am terrified of it.
I mean, seriously. I know this is on Fox News, so my standards should be appropriately lowered, but come on. This is stupid. This has reached a point of blatant, proud ignorance that I cannot even fathom. I would need to drink Drano to get to this level.
It's shocking, really, that we have an entire faction of people in this country who buy into this crap. Really? You think we should lower taxes? What kind of fucking economics class did you take, candidates? I missed the part where cutting taxes to nothing does something positive for the system. Guess what- taxes pay for things. They don't just pay for grandma's healthcare, they also pay for such abominations as roads, schools, national parks, state parks, mass transit, universities, libraries, and regulatory services that keep us good and dandy like the Food and Drug Administration or the Internal Revenue Service (yes, the IRS is a good thing). This is insane. This isn't even capitalism. (This is not Sparta, either.)
Let's talk about capitalism. You see, capitalism isn't "evil." It isn't "good," either. It's a system that looks one way on paper and another way when you add humans. Capitalism, at its core, is a system motivated by companies and economics. Is that a negative? I don't think so. Ideally, a company cares first about its customers, second about its employees, and third about its profits. Why? Because it works. See, when you care about your customers, they buy your products. When they buy your products, you have the wealth to take care of your employees. When you take care of your employees, they have the opportunity to be customers somewhere else, where they spend money and, indirectly, pay money towards the incomes of people who will be your customers. When you disregard your employees and don't take care of them, they cannot afford to spend money. If they can't do that, other people cannot earn money. If there's no surplus money in peoples' pockets, they don't spend it at your company.
This model makes sense to me. It seems to be capitalism, in that we have a constant exchange of money- a back-and-forth flow of wealth, if you will. However, this is not the model we currently use.
What we have is not capitalism. It's a kind of "corporate socialism," in that when companies fail to care for their employees and customers, those companies' leaders are assured economic survival by the government. Even in the cases of companies not directly given money to stay afloat, they still benefit from laws (or lack thereof) that address "golden parachutes" and legal liability for the failure of a company. As long as this system persists, these corporations have no real motivation to care about the welfare of their employees and the rights of their customers.
But I digress. I'm not an economics person by training, and perhaps I'm being a bit of an idealist. All I mean by this is that these candidates are incorrect when they claim to support capitalism. What they support is not capitalism, because it is an unsustainable system to promote the wealth of the few and ignore the welfare of the many. What they support is a system in which the government supports corporations and their leaders without regard to the customers and employees those corporations have scorned. That is more socialist than anything Barack Obama has done, but it isn't in the interests of the citizens. This is why I call it corporate socialism, and I am terrified of it.
Friday, January 13, 2012
In Memoriam
Well, it has been a bit since I last posted. I've started my next semester of school, and it did not start out the way one would have hoped.
I study anthropology (the biological side, not so much the cultural side), and in particular I like osteology and forensic anthropology. The person who inspired this passion, Dr. Karen Ramey Burns, passed away quite unexpectedly last weekend, two days before I was to take forensic anthropology from her. To say it was a shock would be an understatement of astronomical proportions- here was the woman who inspired the focus of my studies, suddenly taken from the world far too soon.
The head of the anthropology department himself informed us of this tragedy, and for that I am grateful. It was a far kinder way to deliver such horrible news than, say, a mass email. Given this, though, it was still an awful day for me and for everyone else who had known her or been inspired by her.
She helped to launch forensic anthropology to its current position in the scientific world, proving its importance by helping to identify victims of genocide, natural disasters, and acts of terrorism. She was one of the leaders in the attempt to uncover Amelia Earhart's fate. She identified remains after the attacks on the World Trade Center and in the wake of Hurricane Katrina's destruction. Dr. Burns helped to found an NGO in Colombia with the purpose of assisting families of victims in Colombia's current guerrilla war. She worked in Bosnia, Haiti, and Guatemala, to name a few.
Dr. Burns didn't do any of this to become famous; a person in this kind of field never does. She did what she did because she cared about people, both the dead and the living they left behind. It takes a strong person to be able to deal with these kinds of remains, and Dr. Burns was one of the strongest individuals I have ever encountered.
I only regret that I only had a year of her time. I sincerely wish I could have had the opportunity to know her better. In such a small amount of time, I was so inspired by everything she had to say. It entirely altered my view of the world, and my view of the dead. Her attitude towards physical anthropology changed my mind about what I wanted to do with my life. I have always had it in my mind that I want to help people, but Karen Ramey Burns made me want to help people who no longer had a way to help themselves. Her attitude made me want to help bring some closure to the families of those people.
Beyond that, Dr. Burns inspired me because her life flew in the face of the attitude that a woman can have a career or a family, but not both. I was already raised by a woman who disproved that theory, and I've never bought into that kind of bullshit thinking. Here was a woman who had managed an impressive career in a difficult field while raising a family. It inspired me further, with the idea that a woman could have a family while traveling the world to do work she believed in wholeheartedly.
To lose such a person is awful. Putting aside my own admiration for her, I thought of her children, and grandchildren. I thought of all the families she helped, all the students she taught, all the people she inspired. It breaks my heart to think of how fortunate I was to get to spend any time with such an inspiring mentor, and how much so many other people will be missing from their own lives because they never had the opportunity I had.
I imagine that such a glowing memorial of a person I hardly knew seems silly. Maybe I seem obsessed. I'm alright with that, because I know that these are genuine sentiments. When I entered school at University of Utah, I didn't know what I want to do. Dr. Burns changed my life, and now I know what I want to do. I've met plenty of people in the past that I respected and admired, but few that have truly changed my outlook on life. The world has lost one of the greatest people to ever grace its surface.
I study anthropology (the biological side, not so much the cultural side), and in particular I like osteology and forensic anthropology. The person who inspired this passion, Dr. Karen Ramey Burns, passed away quite unexpectedly last weekend, two days before I was to take forensic anthropology from her. To say it was a shock would be an understatement of astronomical proportions- here was the woman who inspired the focus of my studies, suddenly taken from the world far too soon.
The head of the anthropology department himself informed us of this tragedy, and for that I am grateful. It was a far kinder way to deliver such horrible news than, say, a mass email. Given this, though, it was still an awful day for me and for everyone else who had known her or been inspired by her.
She helped to launch forensic anthropology to its current position in the scientific world, proving its importance by helping to identify victims of genocide, natural disasters, and acts of terrorism. She was one of the leaders in the attempt to uncover Amelia Earhart's fate. She identified remains after the attacks on the World Trade Center and in the wake of Hurricane Katrina's destruction. Dr. Burns helped to found an NGO in Colombia with the purpose of assisting families of victims in Colombia's current guerrilla war. She worked in Bosnia, Haiti, and Guatemala, to name a few.
Dr. Burns didn't do any of this to become famous; a person in this kind of field never does. She did what she did because she cared about people, both the dead and the living they left behind. It takes a strong person to be able to deal with these kinds of remains, and Dr. Burns was one of the strongest individuals I have ever encountered.
I only regret that I only had a year of her time. I sincerely wish I could have had the opportunity to know her better. In such a small amount of time, I was so inspired by everything she had to say. It entirely altered my view of the world, and my view of the dead. Her attitude towards physical anthropology changed my mind about what I wanted to do with my life. I have always had it in my mind that I want to help people, but Karen Ramey Burns made me want to help people who no longer had a way to help themselves. Her attitude made me want to help bring some closure to the families of those people.
Beyond that, Dr. Burns inspired me because her life flew in the face of the attitude that a woman can have a career or a family, but not both. I was already raised by a woman who disproved that theory, and I've never bought into that kind of bullshit thinking. Here was a woman who had managed an impressive career in a difficult field while raising a family. It inspired me further, with the idea that a woman could have a family while traveling the world to do work she believed in wholeheartedly.
To lose such a person is awful. Putting aside my own admiration for her, I thought of her children, and grandchildren. I thought of all the families she helped, all the students she taught, all the people she inspired. It breaks my heart to think of how fortunate I was to get to spend any time with such an inspiring mentor, and how much so many other people will be missing from their own lives because they never had the opportunity I had.
I imagine that such a glowing memorial of a person I hardly knew seems silly. Maybe I seem obsessed. I'm alright with that, because I know that these are genuine sentiments. When I entered school at University of Utah, I didn't know what I want to do. Dr. Burns changed my life, and now I know what I want to do. I've met plenty of people in the past that I respected and admired, but few that have truly changed my outlook on life. The world has lost one of the greatest people to ever grace its surface.