#106: The Right to Die

Morbid blog entry alert! The faint of heart need to turn back now! You have been warned.

At the end of 2014, there was news buzzing about Oregon’s relatively new act called “Death with Dignity” when Brittany Maynard, 29, who was terminally ill with brain cancer, chose to leave her home in California to move to Oregon and become a resident there, so she could take advantage of this new act. On November 1, 2014, Maynard passed away on her own terms, in her own bed in Oregon, surrounded by family, rather than succumbing to her terminal disease, which would have caused her to painfully waste away in front of her family.

In order to be eligible for the Death with Dignity Act, you must be a resident of a state that has passed the act: Oregon, Vermont, & Washington (soon to be California as well.) Montana also has a similar act in place. Also, in order to qualify, no fewer than two doctors must deem you mentally sound and terminally ill, as well as give you a prognosis of 6 months or less to live. You would not be eligible just based on age or disability. In the event that you are eligible, you may choose one of multiple ways to die on your own terms. Maynard chose to die by ingesting doctor-prescribed pills.

There were, as expected, many critics of this poor young woman’s decision. Many people believe suicide to be wrong or a “sin.” A lot of people contend that it should not be our choice if we live or die; it should be the choice of a higher power or the universe itself. Many people even say that, if you pray to a higher power, you will be healed, and if you are not healed, then the higher power will take you when he/she is ready for you to go. A lot of people who believe in the existence of Heaven & Hell believe that people who commit suicide will no longer be eligible to enter the pearly gates of Heaven, and instead, are doomed to an eternity in Hell. Many people said she should have tried whatever she could to try to survive. Many people believe suicide to be selfish, as you leave behind family that may depend on you, and if they don’t depend on you, they still love you and will hurt when they lose you. For all of these reasons, Maynard endured backlash for her decision. But Maynard countered that she was not committing suicide, because dying was not even a choice for her: “I am not suicidal…I do not want to die. But I am dying. And I want to die on my own terms.” (You can read all about Maynard’s story on www.cnn.com/2014/10/07/opinion/maynard-assisted-suicide-cancer-dignity/.

Put aside your personal beliefs as to whether or not suicide is wrong, or whether or not this situation qualifies as suicide. Let’s think realistically about what this act is. It’s mercy. Once Maynard found out she had terminal brain cancer, she basically lived at the hospital. The doctors told her the tumor would just keep getting worse, and there was no cure for it. They could try to extend her life past her prognosis of 6 months by giving her full brain radiation, a long, painful procedure that wasn’t even guaranteed to make a difference at all. There was no treatment that could save her life, and the recommended treatments would destroy what little life she had left. Doctors told her she would waste away for weeks or even months in extreme pain, while her family watched her lose her verbal, cognitive, and motor skills. It would have been a painful process for both her and her family. THIS was the only life she had left to look forward to, and with only misery left ahead of her, Maynard thought the best decision was to end her life before it became unbearable for all parties involved.

Today on Facebook, I read an article about an elderly couple who committed suicide by jumping in front of an oncoming train, because the wife was wasting away after a brain aneurism, and the husband did not want to live without her. While this is a sad yet still sweet story, this is what happens when people are not allowed to end their lives legally with medical assistance. An innocent, unknowing, unwilling third party (the train conductor) was forcibly involved in this tragic accident, and he will never forget or probably forgive himself for taking 2 lives, even if it wasn’t his fault or done intentionally. A husband and wife died tragically, instead of dying peacefully in their bed. They died alone, rather than surrounded by family and friends. No one knew until right before it happened, when the husband called his son to tell him they loved him, so instead of being let down easy over time, the family was struck with shock and grief. I think the Death with Dignity Act will keep things like this from happening, so it might help way more than hurt.

Now, moving into a bit of a different direction, many people believe it is our right to die with dignity if we are already going to die soon, but I think far fewer people believe it is our right to die at any point in our lives, no matter the circumstances. If a person, whether mentally sound or not, whether terminally ill, just plain old, completely disabled, or perfectly healthy and young, should it be a person’s right to take his/her own life if he/she wishes to do so? I think most people will say no. I think there will be varying reasons why, but I want an answer with substance. When people use excuses such as, it’s a “sin,” it’s wrong, or it’s selfish, I can’t help but think that those answers are just opinions. A lot of people don’t even believe in “sin,” as a lot of people are not Christians, and a lot of people have different understandings as to what qualifies as “wrong.” If there is no direct victim, how can something be wrong? If a person chooses to take his/her own life, it is only directly affecting him/her, not anyone else. For instance, if you murder someone else, it wasn’t that person’s choice to die; he/she is the victim, so murder is wrong. Or if you’re a Christian, murder is a “sin.” And as far as “selfish” goes, everyone has their own opinion on that. Typically when people are so depressed that they want to die, they feel like their family & friends would be better off without them, so they feel like suicide is actually a noble & selfless cause, so this point is also debatable. So if someone simply doesn’t enjoy life & doesn’t want to live anymore, you might have your own morals that make you wish they would fight for their lives & find their happiness, but who are we to tell other people how to live or how to die? Is it our right to interfere?

And if everyone should have the right to die, then are there any reasons to ever deny someone that right? A lot of people agree the terminally ill should have this right, but what about people who are simply old & wasting away? People who are sickly but don’t have a terminal disease? People who are severely disabled? What about people who are physically healthy and young but simply don’t want to live? Should we deny people based on whether or not they are mentally sound? Should we even force them to get a doctor’s opinion, or should we just let them choose their fate & follow through with it?

Please understand I’m not condoning suicide, nor am I trying to make excuses for why it should be legal for people to kill themselves. I am simply asking what other people think about the subject, because I think this is an interesting talking point. However, I do believe the Death with Dignity Act is a great act that should be made available everywhere. No one should have to waste away in severe pain & misery due to a terminal illness, especially when the family would have to watch it happen. Thoughts?

 Brittany Maynard before she passed with dignity.

#105: What NOT to Wear

I keep seeing all of these Facebook posts about empowered young girls who go against the dress code of their schools, get into trouble for it, and then protest it. A lot of these girls contend that they are being “body-shamed,” and that they are “more than a distraction.” They claim they are being forced to miss class to change, so that boys won’t be distracted by them, but instead of teaching girls that they need to hide their sexuality and their bodies, young boys need to be taught that women are not sexual objects. Therefore, these girls believe they should be allowed to dismiss the dress code and wear clothing such as tank tops, spaghetti straps, crop tops, short shorts/skirts, tops in which their bras are showing, etc.

Everyone who knows me even the slightest knows that I’m a feminist. As I believe most people should be, I believe women should be treated in the same way as men. I deplore double standards between male & female genders. I believe women should have the right to make decisions about their own bodies. I hate that people use terms and phrases, such as “be a man,” “you do x like a girl,” etc, because it implies that women are lesser than men. I absolutely hate when men are not allowed to dress like women without major scrutiny, but women can dress like men all they want without being bothered (for the most part,) because it society STILL thinks it’s a sign of weakness for a man to be even the least bit feminine. But I have to say that, for the most part, I disagree with this recent dress code movement.

In a completely unrelated topic, I believe everyone should be able to run around as they please – whether it’s fully-clothed or naked as a jaybird. We are animals. It’s natural. We shouldn’t be ashamed of our bodies, and women are expected to cover much more of their bodies than men are, which are apart of the double standards that I have already mentioned that I hate. But here’s the thing. If a school or a workplace sets a dress code, you are to follow it. That is their school or workplace. They make the rules, not you. They set certain standards for the way they want their school to appear to the public and the higher-ups, and if you don’t meet those requirements, you can either go to another school or simply not go to school.

School dress codes have been in place since schools were started. They set rules & standards for both girls & boys. It’s not about shaming girls’ bodies or oppressing them into missing classes to change clothes. If you come to school with proper clothing in the first place, you won’t miss class. The school sets the dress code, you agree to the dress code when you start school there, and you follow the dress code. It’s not about girls vs. boys. In my high school, whether you were a boy or a girl, you weren’t allowed to wear pants below your hips, show your boxers/bra, wear sleeveless shirts, go without belts, go without your shirts being tucked into your pants, wear shorts/skirts that were shorter than 3 inches above the knee, etc, whether you were a boy or a girl. We even had to wear ID badges around our necks at my high school! (Anyone who doesn’t have to do that should count his/her blessings.) Everyone had to follow these rules. There were rules that were more geared toward girls, and there were rules that were more geared toward boys, but everyone had to abide by all of these rules. They are set to make the school appear professional to onlookers, as well as to ready its students for a professional career someday. Try going into a job interview with a crop top & short shorts, and see if you get the job. On the first day of said job, (which you wouldn’t get anyway, because you showed up to the interview with a crop top & short shorts,) show up in a mini-skirt & spaghetti straps with your bra hanging out, and see how long you last there. I doubt your protests about that workplace’s dress code being in place to shame and oppress women will fly there. Dress codes are in place for a reason. Someone else’s school = that person’s rules.

Now, I totally understand you being annoyed over a Draconian dress code, such as girls not being allowed to pants, or boys having to wear a bow tie. I even understand if you don’t like your school enforcing a school uniform. I still think you should obey the school rules, but if these instances are a problem, I understand if you want to protest this peacefully & respectfully without actually breaking the school rules while they are in place.

I also totally understand if a school has tons of dress code rules set for girls but none or few for boys. I get your point if there are rules set for both boys and girls, but the boys get away with not abiding by the dress code, while the girls are made to miss class over breaking dress code. Again, I hate double standards. Not only should you be upset about this, but you should protest it – not by disobeying the rules yourself, but by bringing this to the higher ups’ attention and demanding that the boys be forced to adhere to the same rules that the girls are forced to follow. So if this is something that is going on at your school, I definitely understand fighting for equality. But if everyone is held accountable for the dress code rules, then I don’t understand the uproar. It seems to me like a lot of children are trying to take a good cause (feminism) and warp it to fit their agenda of defying school rules. And I find it ridiculous. It’s twisting the good cause of feminism into something it’s not, and thus, discrediting it.

Young girls: I can not speak for all schools or for all situations, but more than likely, you are NOT being victimized. Yes, boys need to be taught not to view or treat girls as sexual objects. Yes, you are more than a distraction. Your education matters. You are worth just as much as any boy at your school is worth. But your school dress code is more than likely NOT victimizing you, trying to tell you that your education doesn’t matter as much as that of the boys at your school, nor teaching boys that you are a sexual object. This is not about you; it’s about all students. It’s about all students obeying the rules set for them by the people who own the place where you get your education, as well as teaching you how to dress professionally, as you are expected to do in the real world after high school is over.

PLEASE GET OVER YOURSELF, and leave my great feminism cause alone, since you clearly do not understand it.…………………………And tuck in your shirt.

#104: What a Privilege!

To my dismay, I’ve had a few friends & acquaintances say some things that are a bit strange about white privilege, and I feel like maybe some context might make people understand the concept a bit better. These friends & acquaintances have said things to the effect of “I hate when people tell me I have white privilege. I grew up in a poor family & never had privileges. Just because I’m white doesn’t mean I had everything growing up, and it doesn’t mean I don’t work hard. This hatefulness directed toward me, just because I’m white, is oppressing me.” Just…no. I want to shed some light on what it really means to be oppressed, and what white privilege really means. Also, I want to discuss some ways that white people can use white privilege for good – do something honorable with it. But first, we white people, have to admit we have white privilege, and hopefully this entry will help you to come to terms with that fact. Here are some bullet point ideas to help you understand this concept more fully:

1. If you are white, then you automatically have white privilege, point blank. Even if you are mixed but appear to be white, you can have white privilege. I don’t care if you grew up in a poor family or had a rough childhood. If you are white, you were born into the group of people that are in power in this country. You don’t have to worry about a cop following you while you’re driving, just to catch you when you slip up. You don’t have to watch women hug their purses close to them when you get onto the subway. You don’t have to hear car locks engaging when you walk by someone sitting in their car. You don’t have to worry about a store employee eye-balling you while you shop, making sure you don’t steal anything. You don’t have to worry about coming across an article on the internet, in which a black person was charged with a crime, and see a prejudiced commenter calling all black people “gorillas” or “thugs.” You can apply for a job & not have to worry whether or not the person doing the hiring is secretly biased against people whose names sound “ethnic.” You most likely come from a family that has been here legally for a couple of centuries, so you don’t have to worry every time someone knocks on your door, scared that it might be the police coming to deport your parents. If you approach a police officer while unarmed, you probably don’t fear that he will shoot you. If you commit a crime, people will consider you “mentally ill” & “misguided,” while your black counterparts will be considered “thugs that should be hung from a tree.” (Yes, I have actually seen people say these things on the internet.) These are the small things that white people don’t have to worry about that people of color do – and you might not even realize these things happen, because they’ve never happened to you. And what about the big things? Did you know that a white male with a criminal record is 5% more likely to get hired for a job over a male of color with a clean record? And what about the man named Jose who never received any job interviews with his resume until he changed his name to Joe? You can read about that story in the article “He Dropped One Letter in His Name while Applying for Jobs, and the Responses Rolled in” on Huffpost.com. White people are far more likely than people of color to graduate high school, get into college, find a decent job, stay out of jail when they do something illegal, and not be shot by police while they are unarmed. Even if you’re not the type of white person to perpetuate racism, the point is YOU don’t have to worry about any of these terrible things happening to YOU.

2. White privilege is NOT your fault. It’s not your fault that you happened to be born into the group of people who basically run the country. You didn’t choose your skin color. Stop being offended when people talk to you about white privilege, as if that is a put down, because it’s not. They’re criticizing a flawed system that puts white people at the top. It’s not a personal attack directed at you. And the fact that people criticize white privilege does NOT oppress you. You are still at the top. Your race still practically runs this country. You still don’t have to worry about encountering instances of racism like the examples I gave in #1, so please stop using the term “oppression” so incorrectly. They do always say that equality feels a lot like oppression when you’re used to being at the top.

3. Just because you were born into white privilege doesn’t mean anyone is claiming that you haven’t worked hard for what you have. Everyone has their hardships. It’s apart of being a human being. Maybe you grew up in a poor household.  Maybe you were a victim of child abuse growing up. Maybe you lived in a bad neighborhood. I’m sure you have dealt with some hardships, just like everyone has. But think about how people of color go through their own fair share of hardships that all people have, on TOP of encountering racism all the time, even if it’s not blatant racism. Yes, I’m sure you worked very hard for that degree of yours. You worked your butt off to get the best grades in high school, so you could be accepted to the best college. You then worked your butt off in college to get the best GPA & graduate with honors. You worked 50+ hours a week to be able to afford to go to that college & racked up some intense debt that you will now spend years paying off. You tirelessly searched for a good job that would allow you to provide for yourself and your family, as well as pay your debts. We get it. Just because you’re white doesn’t mean someone just handed you your diploma for free & went on with their day. But your black counterpart did all of that, while enduring racism along the way. Your black counterpart had to work just a little bit harder to get where he/she is & had to overcome some obstacles that you couldn’t even dream about, because you don’t know that kind of hardship. And it’s ok. No one expects you to understand those hardships, but we do expect you to come to terms with the fact that you have a small privilege over your counterparts of various colors.

You can do one of three things with your white privilege: deny you even have white privilege, and pretend that racism isn’t as bad as it actually is; use your white privilege to trample on other races, so that you can make it to the top more quickly and easily; or use your white privilege to help people of color raise up. Stand up for the black kid in school who is being bullied because of his skin color. Put people in their place when you see them throwing around racial slurs on social media. If you see blatant racism, try to stop it, or at least bring it to the attention of the people around you. Don’t ignore it. If you ignore it, you are just as bad as the oppressors. Let’s face it; because white people have privilege, people will pay much more attention to a white person standing against racism than they will pay attention to a person of color saying the exact same thing. So it’s the duty of the people with white privilege to stand up & do something. Watch this video for a great example of someone using her white privilege to help a black woman & put a racist person in her place: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1141203362587187&id=354522044588660. All you have to do is admit that you have privilege, and then use it for good – to help others who do not have such privilege. And then you’re doing something admirable, rather than perpetuating or ignoring the problem.

#103: Her Name Is Caitlyn

I’ve seen a lot of hatred toward transgenders lately, and a lot of the buzz has surrounded Caitlyn Jenner’s recent transition from male to female. She was awarded the Arthur Ashe Award for Courage, for which she received ample criticism, as people all over the country said that what she did was not courageous. And of course, the same people keep referring to her by her dead name, Bruce Jenner, as well as her dead pronouns, he/him/his. I want to explain a few things to you guys about transgenders, and I hope no transgenders out there are upset that I’m explaining this, because obviously I have never experienced it in my life. But from a cis-gendered woman’s point of view, I want to explain to my fellow cis-gendered friends some etiquette that I think we should all live by in order to respect our fellow human beings, no matter their gender identity.

First thing’s first. I don't care if you like Caitlyn at all. There are many people who believe she is vain and fails to realize that some people aren't rich and can't afford a gender reassignment surgery, so they call her out for her character. That's fine! If you don't like her for who she is as a person, that's one thing, but you better be respectful of who she is as a person, because you never know who is listening to you put her down for her gender identity, when it's really her character that should be judged.

I don’t care if you think Caitlyn has exhibited enough bravery to be awarded the Arthur Ashe Award. There are many people who share this view, and I’m not saying that I fully disagree. I do believe that the 2 women who were the first women in history to graduate from ranger school, Capt. Kristen Griest & 1^st Lt. Shaye Haver, are incredibly brave. I believe that any person who is willing to go to battle for this country (or any country, for that matter) is brave. I think people, specifically children, battling life-threatening diseases are brave. The list goes on. And if we are going to award someone the highest of the high courage awards, the first person who came to mind probably wouldn’t have been Caitlyn Jenner, if I’m being honest. However, I do believe there are all kinds of heroes in this world. There are levels of heroism & courage, and you would have to be completely blinded by hatred for the LGBTQ+ community to not see the reasons why Caitlyn is, indeed, a hero to many – particularly to young people struggling with their identity.

A few statistics might be helpful in understanding why every trans person who is willing to come out to the world & be who they are, despite the potential consequences is, indeed, brave. Check out the HRC Research Overview on Hate Crimes and Violence against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People. Approx. 49% of transgender teens attempt suicide. Transgendered youth whose parents force them to adhere to their birth-assigned gender tend to experience higher rates of depressing, illegal drug use, & suicide attempts than do their cis-gendered counterparts whose parents don’t put that kind of pressure on them. In Chicago, for instance, 18% of homeless youth identify as transgender. Parents are far more likely to abandon their children if they identify as transgender or have identity issues. One in 12 white transgender people is murdered in the U.S, and those statistics rise to 1 in 8 if the transgender person is of color. This is disturbing. Any transgender who is willing to open up to the world & be who they are, no matter what the consequences may be, is incredibly brave, if you ask me. And I think the reason people have awarded Caitlyn Jenner this prestigious honor above all other transgender folks is simply because she is in the limelight. She has a lot more to lose than many other transgender folks. She is in the public’s eye and is subject to much harsher scrutiny, because everyone knows who she is. I’m not saying that other, less famous or not-at-all famous transgender people aren’t brave, because they are, but I think this is particularly why Jenner was chosen for this award.

Now, whether or not you agree with this award being given to Jenner is really a moot point. There are people on both ends of the issue. Yes, I think she is incredibly brave, but the first people who come to mind when I think of giving such a prestigious award would be military personnel, cops, firefighters, etc. But again, there are all kinds of different heroes out there, and Jenner was a big part of the media at the time she was given the award. I get not accepting that she won the award. I get having someone else in mind who you believe to be more deserving. I get not liking her as a person, because of her vanity, or whatever else you don't like about her character. What I don’t get is all of the disrespect toward Jenner, just because of who she has decided to be and how she has decided to live her life, which in no way affects anyone else.

Here’s how to respect Jenner & other transgender people: 1. Call her by the name she has chosen for herself. That is the name she feels best  suits her, and which she is most comfortable hearing. What skin is it off your back to call her Caitlyn, instead of Bruce? It’s wrong to dead name someone. Bruce Jenner no longer exists; her name is Caitlyn. Why do you people call me Jo? My birth name is Jordan, but people call me Jo. Why? Because I asked them to. That is the name I’ve chosen to go by, and I feel most comfortable when people outside of my family call me that. And most people respect that, because that respect me, so they call me by the name I asked them to call me. It’s as simple as that. 2. Call her by the pronouns that she feels describe her. Biologically, she may be a male. She may have been born with male genitalia & XY chromosomes, but her gender identity is something completely separate from that. She feels like a female on the inside, like she was born in the wrong body. And that’s ok. Whether you agree with it or not, it is very disrespectful to use dead pronouns when describing a transgender person.

One more thing that everyone should do, for the sake of being a good person: support the cause. You don’t have to agree to realize that the statistics above are disgusting. You can think being transgender is the most terrible thing in the world if you want, but you should realize that these people are important. They shouldn’t be murdered in overwhelming numbers just because of the way they choose to live their lives, which affects no one but themselves. They shouldn’t have to live their lives in fear of being bullied, abused, or murdered. They shouldn’t have to hate themselves so much that they feel the need to commit suicide to get away from such an evil world that hates them for no reason. For the sake of humanity, we should all come together & fight the hatred displayed toward people who are different. Do you know how to join the fight against this hatred? Stop talking about transgender people as if they are lesser than you. Stop talking about how they are “sinning,” and how they are “not natural.” Stop publicly speaking out against how they are living their lives, since their lifestyles don’t affect you in any way. Live your life the way you want to, and live by example if you think they’re “sinning.” No matter how you feel about their lifestyle, you should hate the statistics I showed you even more & want to put a stop to them. THAT will ring way ouder & truer than any bashing you do toward other people.

I present to you, Caitlyn Jenner.

#102: Politically Correct = Respect

I never thought I’d be writing a blog entry about political correctness as a top issue, but here we are. There are an astonishing number of people who agree with 2016 GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump that we should completely stop being politically correct and tip-toeing around people’s feelings. And of course, there are people on the opposite end of the spectrum that say Trump is wrong, and that political correctness is important. Google’s definition of political correctness is “the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.” Lately, the argument over political correctness is that some people are unhappy that the new trend is to say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas,” and that many people are pushing to do away with phrases such as “In God we trust” or “God bless America” (particularly when it comes to keeping those phrases on U.S. currency,) in order to keep from offending non-Christians. The pot has been stirred by incidents such as Starbucks removing all Christmas decorations from their seasonal holiday cups, so as to make their company more inclusive. A lot of people are not ok with this & consider this a “war on Christmas.” Plenty of people in the world do not embrace change and don’t want to alter their speech or actions, because they’ve never had to do that, and they feel like it is silly. A lot of these people feel like other people are overly sensitive these days. In backlash to these “overly sensitive” people, for instance, Sheriff Jolley of Harris County, Georgia posted a sign on government property that reads “WARNING: Harris County is politically incorrect. We say: Merry Christmas, God Bless America, and In God We Trust. We salute our troops and our flag. If this offends you… LEAVE!” This sign has received ample praise & criticism from both sides of the issue. So I’m here to try to clear things up a little bit and see if we can’t find some middle ground here.

For anyone who doesn’t really understand why people are so upset about political incorrectness, imagine you are the minority. You moved to a different country – let’s say, for example, a country that allows religious freedom but happens to be majority Islamic, such as Mali. You are a Christian surrounded by all of these Islamics, and around their holidays, they are always telling you “Eid Mubarak,” while not taking into account that you might not celebrate that holiday, because you are a Christian. You are completely overwhelmed by all of the decorations around town that are in celebration of these holidays, and you understand that that comes with the territory of moving to a country that is majority Islamic, even if everyone has a right to their own religious beliefs. So you shake it off. Everyone is just trying to be nice to you and spread Eid cheer. But then you see a sign on government property that says “WARNING: The city of Bamako is politically incorrect. We say: Eid Mubarak, Allah Bless Mali, and In Allah We Trust. We salute our troops and our flag. If this offends you… LEAVE!” Would you feel comfortable living there? Or would you feel like your beliefs & values were being undermined by the majority?

What a lot of people don’t understand is that it’s not always about what random people say in daily life. If someone tells me Merry Christmas, I’m going to say thank you and move on with my day. Even if I didn’t celebrate Christmas, I would realize this person was just trying to be nice and spread Christmas cheer. I believe that’s the way most people see this issue. For instance, I had a professor in my last semester of college who was Jewish. Right after graduation, I was still working as a server at a restaurant. That professor and his two kids came to my restaurant, and surprised to see them, I served them. At the end of the meal, the professor’s small daughter told me “Happy Hanukkah!” Now, I don’t celebrate Hanukkah, but do you know what I said back? “Happy Hanukkah to you too, sweetie!” While I realize that’s not really comparable, because Christianity is the majority in the U.S, while Judaism is the minority, this is the best comparison I can give.

But the issue doesn’t lie there. The issue lies in the government or any government personnel pushing an agenda of Christianity on everyone in this country, forgetting about religious freedom and separation of church & state. It’s the issue of sheriff speaking for an entire community, putting a sign on government property that essentially asserts that any visitors or residents will not be accepted in the county if they do not prescribe to that county’s collective religious beliefs. It’s essentially telling them that their differences will not be respected there. It’s an issue of a company being persecuted by Christians who believe they have a right to drink their morning beverages from cups that have emblems of their religious holiday plastered all over it, while completely ignoring people with different beliefs. It’s an issue of a man who hopes to hold the highest office that this country has, who is saying whatever he wants, no matter how prejudiced, bigoted, or just plain rude, thus pushing an agenda to allow the people of the majority to be openly misogynistic, racist, religionist, and homophobic without any consequences. It’s saying things that you know might be hurtful or rude to another person. Try going up to your boss at work & saying exactly what you think of him/her, and let me know how that works out for you. Every other human being in this world deserves just as much respect as your boss does, even if other people can’t fire you from your job.

It’s about respect. THAT is what political correctness is. It’s admitting that you are not the only person in this world, and your religion is no better or more deserving than that of anyone else in this country. It’s speaking and acting in a manner that says “I may not agree with you, but I respect you as an equal.” This particularly refers to the government and the way they treat people that are not apart of the majority. However, everyone can practice political correctness. It doesn’t mean that you have to tip-toe around overly sensitive people’s feelings. It’s the basic respect and manners that I know all of your mothers taught you growing up. It’s doing what we’ve been doing our entire lives thus far, and NOT listening to an outrageous presidential candidate who wants to take us back to a time when minority religious persecution was an everyday norm.

By the way, so everyone is clear, a lot of people are upset about the idea of political correctness and think it will destroy America, because they think political correctness’s advocates want to destroy their freedom of speech. No one is calling for that right to be taken away. We are just requesting that everyone be more mindful & respectful of other people. You do and always will have your right to be as rude & bigoted as you want, no matter how many times we ask you to be nice. It’s your choice which side you want to be on.

 This is what we are fighting against.

This is Sheriff Jolley, the man who abused his power to put this sign on government grounds.

#101: ‘Tis the Season to Be Greedy, Fa-La-La-La-La-La-La-La-La

Ok, I know I failed to upload this blog entry before Thanksgiving, but at least this is coming just in time for Christmas! I have been saying things about this topic since I was a teenager, but I think this is the first year that other people have shared the same concerns. So I’m talking about forcing retail workers to work on major family holidays, such as Thanksgiving & Christmas. There seem to be two opinions surrounding this, and they are at opposite extremes: 1. Retail stores shouldn’t be open on big family holidays, so retail workers don’t have to work & miss time with family and 2. I want to shop on Thanksgiving, and no one is going to stop me. But I think there’s more to this issue than just that. Since I love alternate perspectives, as you know if you’ve read my blog before, I’m going to offer up an alternate perspective on this issue, as well as a few potential consensuses.

The issue here is that people are saying it’s wrong for retail stores to be open on big family holidays, forcing their workers to work & miss time with their families. A lot of people are asking everyone to refrain from shopping on these holidays, so the companies’ doors will close due lack of demand. Some are even asking that we boycott these companies year-round, because it’s not of good moral compass to force workers to work on big family holidays. This is definitely a noble cause in essence. People are offering rebuttals on the pretense that these workers know what they are getting into when they take the job, and that they are paid double-time for their work on holidays. These people are even making fun, stating that everyone would have a cow if doctors & cops did not work on holidays. And of course, the group that is against retailers opening their doors on these holidays has a counter-rebuttal for these: 1. Yes, people know about the store’s policies before they start working there, but that doesn’t make it ok. They take the job, because they need it, and another opportunity may not be immediately available to them. People take jobs that remove money for taxes, but not everyone is ok with that happening. A lot of people hate paying taxes for certain things, but they really have no choice in the matter, since they have to have a job. If life’s struggles get a person down, that is essentially forced compliance; 2. Stating that all stores pay their workers double-time if they are open on a major holiday is a gross assumption. A lot of stores don’t offer any kind of extra monetary incentives but still force their workers to miss time with their family to do what they do every single day of their lives. Also, even if they are getting paid double-time, that doesn’t excuse the situation. You can’t put a price on family time & rest; and 3. No one is arguing that doctors & cops have to work on holidays. That is a necessary evil. This is a matter of need vs. greed. Retail stores don’t NEED to be open on holidays. They are greedy & want to rake in as much money as they can, at their workers’ expense, all the while paying them poorly. (Even if they are being paid double-time, they still probably aren’t making much.)

Now, here’s my thing. For the most part, I agree with this, but there’s something else that kind of makes me re-think my stance. What about the workers who really NEED to work? They are practically paid slave wages, so I can imagine there are some people who genuinely can’t take a day off work. It’s a sad truth. Lots of people don’t care about the holidays as much as most people do, and lots of people aren’t close to their families. Lots of people live far away from their families, and some people don’t even have family. Not everyone celebrates the big, popular holidays in the U.S, because they aren’t Christians or aren’t from here, so they don’t prescribe to U.S. norms. Some people do work double-time on holidays and like that incentive. Last Christmas, I had to go inside a gas station for something on Christmas day. I felt bad about it, so I told the worker I was sorry he had to work on Christmas. He said he was happy to be there, because he was getting paid double-time. Some people are more than happy to work for extra money, even on holidays. Who am I to demand that we take away these workers’ pay days? I mean, when I worked retail, we were all stepping all over each other to be the one who had the day off on holidays, and none of the stores I ever worked at offered any extra money incentives on big holidays, so I ended up quitting like 2 jobs before the holidays, just because I wanted to see my family instead. But that was several years ago, and times change. Every place is different too – every city, every store. Personally, I hate the idea of forcing workers to work on holidays, so I choose to refrain from shopping on holidays, but I’m not going to push an agenda of boycotting stores year-round, because they are open on major holidays. I’m not going to yell & scream & make a fuss over a store being open on Thanksgiving. It is my personal opinion that it is greedy for them to do that, but if someone wants to work on Christmas, let him/her work!

So here are some compromises I’m offering to companies who want to stay open on major holidays: 1. Give workers a choice. Ask all of your workers ahead of time if they want to be open on major holidays. Give them an extra monetary incentive, and let them decided by vote. If enough people agree to work, then open your doors, and let the workers who voted to open the doors work, while the workers who voted not to work have the day off with family. If not enough people want to work, then close the doors; 2. Make sure you, at the very least, let workers know you are planning to be open on major holidays when you hire them, and get their verbal or written confirmation that they understand and agree to this. A lot of companies won’t even tell you anything until the holiday rolls around. I worked for a restaurant that normally closed at 10pm. I was on the schedule to work New Years Eve, and I figured they would be open, but no one told me until a few days before, that we were going to be open for extended hours on New Years Eve – until something like 2am. That was not ok with me, because I already had plans for the night, and I just don’t think it’s right to not tell your workers this pertinent information beforehand; and 3. Take into account your workers’ beliefs & values. If you are going to be open on a major holiday, and someone genuinely wants the day off, you should give it to them. If enough people want the holiday off, then refer back to #1.

Everyone deserves a holiday, but everyone also deserves to work if they have an opportunity and want to take it. I think it’s just as awful to force someone who wants to work on a major holiday to not be able to work, as it is to force someone who doesn’t want to work on a major holiday to work. It’s greedy for these companies to open their doors on major holidays, don’t get me wrong. They are not doing it to give their workers another opportunity to make money; they are doing it to put money in their own pockets. So that’s why I say, if you are, personally, against shopping on major holidays, like I am, then don’t do it! Boycotting a company year-round for their choice to be open on major holidays is a bit silly, and screaming from the hilltops how much you deplore companies for forcing their workers to work on major holidays is annoying. Since there is no right or wrong answer here when you think about both side of the story, just focus on yourself. Don’t shop on Christmas if you don’t believe in doing that. Other than that, just focus on pushing stores to adhere to the compromises I offered above.

#100: Talk about Your Equal Reproductive Rights!

First off, I’m just going to go ahead & congratulate myself on making it to my 100^th Dodger Logic entry. I have been writing this blog since 2009. As I’ve become older & wiser, I have revisited almost all of my entries & modified them at least once. At times, I have really kept up with it – writing entry after entry, and at times, I have been so busy that I’ve gone months without writing a single word. I wish I could make this my job, as I love writing, but for now, it’s just a hobby. But I’m proud of how much I’ve written & the ideas that I’ve put out there – most of which I’d like to think will get people’s brains going, and if you’re a reasonable person, I’d like to think you might read some of my articles & be able to see both sides of each argument, rather than just your side. (This may not apply to some of my articles, but I think it applies to a lot of them.) Anyway, I don’t even know if anyone actually reads these, but I wanted to take this time to thank anyone who does. This is the way I get my opinions & emotions out, and I appreciate anyone who listens to my opinions, even if you don’t agree with them.

Now, after that book, here is my 100^th Dodger Logic blog entry:

I just read the most insanely neat article called “Uterine Transplants May Allow Men to Give Birth within 5 Years” on www.thegailygrind.com. The article was written in response to the new information released on the Cleveland Clinic’s new ability to potentially do uterus transplants in cis-gendered women who are not able to reproduce. But this article discusses how scientists may be able to develop technology to transplant uteri into men & transgender women in the future, so that they can carry babies & give birth, just like cis-gendered women can. Holy cow! Read the article for more specifics on how this works. There is not a whole lot of scientific information, but it’s worth the read. You can also check out my blog entry “Dodger Logic #69: A New Age of Procreation” if you like similar topics. Now, I’m looking through the comments on this article of course, and apart from some transphobic, bigoted jerks commenting, people are posing some seriously interesting arguments (on both sides) about whether or not this is a good idea. And of course, after reading the article, my own arguments came to mind. So I’m going to go through the pros & cons of this kind of research. You’ll notice none of my arguments will be “Ew, that’s just gross.” The people who have commented these kinds of things on this article annoy me, as that opinion is neither scientific, nor thoughtful, and it is rude to anyone who may be in this situation. And please note that, any of these arguments can be used as a pro or con for any kind of new-age reproduction, whether it's for men/transgender women or cis-gendered women, whether it involves a transplanted uterus or an artificial uterus, etc.

First and foremost, I’ll go ahead & just throw out there that this research is super interesting. When people said humans would never fly, we did it. When people said humans would never touch down on the moon, we proved them wrong. Breakthroughs in scientific research can be the difference between life & death, misery & happiness, etc. Not to mention, it’s just neat to see what humans can do! I mean, look at what we’ve already done so far!

As an environmental science graduate, I think the best argument is the one that immediately came to my mind after reading the article: overpopulation. Lots of people will say overpopulation is a myth, or that it’s not important. Lots of people will say there’s plenty of space for people to live comfortably in this world, no matter what scientists say. Well, I implore anyone who believes this to live in Atlanta for a week. It can take 2 hours to get to your job that is only 20 minutes away. And I know that’s just in big cities, but that’s where most people want to go, because that’s where most of the jobs are. Besides, it’s not about space; it’s about resources. It’s about how quickly this many people on the planet are using up our planet’s natural resources, how much pollution we are creating that is killing the planet, and how many species that we are wiping out with our growing “needs.” We are a greedy species, and our wastefulness doesn’t seem to be slowing down at all. There are already tons of people on this planet, including kids, who are homeless, unemployed, & starving. Do we really want to try to fit more people into this world? Do we really need more children in the world, while others live on the streets, in orphanages, & in foster homes with no family or love? Or is adopting the better choice, so we can save the lives that are already on this planet before introducing more to the mix? Right now, only females are able to reproduce. That’s slightly more than half of the population. Add men/transgender women into the mix, and that’s 100% of the population who could potentially reproduce. Imagine how the world’s population would skyrocket. Now imagine what that would do to our planet.  (Of course, that is assuming that the technology became so good that these procedures became common practice, easily accessible, & inexpensive enough for the middle class to afford.) Yikes.

A lot of people are criticizing the unknown part of this science. The article doesn’t give a lot of scientific information behind the research & studies that have been or will be conducted, so there’s not much to go off of right now. Commenters are saying this is selfish technology, because people with male anatomy can not support or give birth to a baby the way an anatomically female body can – even with hormones & organ transplants. So how will the baby turn out? Would it have the physical and mental characteristics as a “natural-born” baby? Would it turn out physically deformed or mentally slow? Would this be the best thing for the baby? A lot of people are adamant that something will go wrong in this process, and while there is no scientific evidence in this article to support or deny these claims, I can see where these commenters are coming from. Any time you try something new and incredible in science, there are bound to be some problems that arise, whether it’s just in the beginning or something that occurs once in a blue moon. However, I will throw out there that scientists have been transplanting uteri into cis-gendered women who do not have their own uteri for awhile with good results. However, these are cis-gendered women who also contain estrogen, a cervix, ovaries, & other reproductive parts that are pertinent for childbirth. Some extensive studies still need to be, as it appears, and I think that’s also something a lot of people don’t think is fair to the child – to have to be apart of studies in this new research. These kids will be trial runs with this new technology. We have been doing trial runs with children in similar studies in the past. Is that ok?

Some people say this is unnatural/against nature. Ok, well so are vaccines, in-vitro, antibiotics, birth control, & whole slew of other things we use daily in this world. I don’t really view this to be a reason not to advance our technology that could make tons of other people in this world happy, but a lot of people hold this view.

Yup, you guessed it. Some people are even saying this is ungodly or “playing God.” This kind of goes hand-in-hand with the “unnatural” argument. We have been “playing God” for hundreds of thousands of years. Honestly, we “play God” every day. If we don’t live in the wild with no electricity, running water, tv, internet, cars, or any other kind of technology, then we are basically “playing God.” The argument is still up in the air as to whether or not that makes this ok. I understand this argument, and I’m not saying I fully disagree with it. But I do love science, and I tend to hold the view that, if there is a God, why would he give us such intelligence & expect us not to use it? You say “If God wanted men/trangender women to reproduce, he would’ve given them the anatomy to do so.” To that, I retort “If God wanted us all to sit around and do nothing, then he wouldn’t have given us this massive brain power & all of these beautiful resources in the world for us to work with.” You say “If God wanted men/transgender women to reproduce, he would have given them the tools to do,” to which I reply “Exactly.” Now, some people don’t believe in God, so this is a completely invalid point to those people, but in general, I think this a point that needs to be taken into account, since so many people do believe in God & hold this view.

I may live in a fantasy world half of the time, but I am also all about practicality. How practical are these procedures? Even if one man/transgender woman in the relationship gets to carry the baby inside his/her body for 9 months & deliver it, the baby will not be the spawn of both of the people in the relationship unless one was able to provide an egg. But then again, if you check out my blog entry that I mentioned above, “Dodger Logic #69: A New Age of Procreation,” some scientists believe they may be able to transform a sperm into an egg in the future, so maybe someday, two men/transgender women will be able to have their own baby with their own DNA. But if this does not happen, then not only will the person trying to have the baby have to have a uterus implanted inside him/her, but he/she will also have to undergo in-vitro (although, there has been talk of people using artificial external uteri, rather than growing the babies in their own bodies, but this came from my other blog entry I just referenced, not the article in question.) How much of a hassle will this be if getting a uterus transplant & in-vitro are necessary? How long will the whole process take? Will it take longer than using a surrogate or adopting instead? What approval will people need to get in order to proceed with the actual process of getting a transplanted uterus & in-vitro fertilization? Will many doctors approve of this & be willing to try this with a patient? How much will it cost? Will insurance really cover it? SHOULD insurance cover it? What happens after the child is born? You can’t just leave a uterus inside a man/transgender woman and keep that person on anti-rejection hormones for his/her whole life, and if you take them off of those hormones, the body may reject & absorb the foreign uterus, which could cause infections & maybe even death. The question above about whether or not this technology could harm babies comes to mind here as well. What risks would these people be taking, as it relates to their health & the health of their babies? I know it’s too soon to be asking these questions, since as the article says, this isn’t even something that has been researched yet; it’s just something people have been wondering about, since we now know we can give cis-gendered women who lack uteri implanted uteri. But even that research is still relatively new.

Perhaps the most beautiful view on this is that this could bring so much happiness to so many LGBTQ+ people who have always wanted to have their own children that have grown inside their own bodies, so they can experience the magic of carrying a baby for 9 months & bringing it into this world. It’s beautiful that a person who has always wanted this, but never imagined it would ever happen, might be able to do this one day. Everyone does, afterall, have their own rights to do what they want with their lives, bodies, & money, even if other people disapprove of those choices.

As with any scientific break-through, whether or not it is morally ok to do this is completely up to your own opinion. It’s another conundrum where, for many people, it comes down to religion vs. science. And maybe for some people, it doesn’t even have anything to do with religion, but personal morals. Everyone is going to give their 2 cents on technology this incredible & powerful. Do we have an obligation to God/the universe to stick with what we view to be “natural?” Do we have an obligation to the planet to try our hardest to keep the world population under control? Do we have an obligation to our fellow human beings to keep them & their potential future children safe from such technology that could harm them? Do we have an obligation to humanity to fix our homeless/parentless problem for the kids that are already here before we create even more? Or do we have an obligation to the LGBTQ+ community to give them the option to carry their children & birth them like cis-gendered women can, since we have potentially found this technology that may allow us to do so? Where does the biggest, most important obligation lie?

I am pretty sure this is just art and not meant to spark any kind of scientific idea that someday men/transgender women will be able to reproduce. I think it's just meant to be interesting, but this is certainly a great picture for this blog entry.

In the seahorse world, the males give birth.