What a delight to read these posts! As the excitement about the presidential debates builds, I think it is important to realize that any “change” promised by either candidate depends on much more than a leader. It is a matter of setting a new direction: I believe that the hope for any real change in our lives lies in the awakening of the human heart and mind. Such an awakening transforms the quality of all our relationships, and as we develop the skills that lead us in that direction, we may come to embody a different kind of Love — one that has long been misunderstood. This kind of Love is not a feeling; it is a great power — an intelligence which has long been present inside us. Accessing it, however, depends on our willingness to proceed. If we have made up our minds, if we believe what we know, and know what we believe, we will not have even begun to address the biased thinking that keeps us all so thoroughly programmed for conflict.

If there is any real hope for us — man and woman, Arab and Jew, East and West, it doesn’t lie in the rising up of a great leader. The Time of the hero is past. No rescuer will come to solve our conflicts for us, or fill the deep crevices of earth with oil again, or season poisoned land with sweetness. But if we are willing to step forward and begin to change our mind — to let go of our own certitude, be it religious or philosophical or scientific — we will have joined the legions who are contributing to a new kind of consciousness, one that sees differently.

This is not the same as thinking differently. It is the conscious emergence of a radical kind of Love that holds both sides of a conflict in its embrace. According to Teilhard de Chardin, the transforming power of Love can alone create a true human community. In his words, “The fire of love may be the only energy capable of extinguishing the threat of another fire, namely that of universal conflagration and destruction.” This kind of Love unifies. Its evolution is already happening in all of us.

Anne
www.AnneHillman.net

Offerings celebrates Anne and her new book, Awakening the Energies of Love: Discovering Fire for the Second Time. This book illuminates the awakening of the human heart and mind to a different kind of Love—one that has long been misunderstood. Anne Hillman suggests that such a love is an intelligence to which we are all heir and have been forever called. Whether you are just beginning to explore this kind of awareness or have been inquiring for many years, you will find Awakening the Energies of Love to be an adventure and a sure guide to the deeper currents within and around you. Visit www.AnneHillman.net to order your - and your loved ones’ - copy.

I have received yet another “great” article in my inbox. Given that we all aspire to some sense of systems thinking - when can we (in dialogue) go out beyond the normal frames and start the deeper research into creating the ground by which we can take on the invisible?  And, while I think this article in Newsweek - could be any article at this point - is interesting, it is the same mechanistic-secular mind doing what it knows best, reducing “people” to the particular in a way that holds contempt as reason, and reason as disconnected from truth - you know what I mean, truth is not found in contempt, right?

What if we go where few go? I am still deeply interested in who the being Sarah Palin is karmically and who she is in relation to world history - who is she in our lives? What are we to make of her presence in understanding human evolution? What frames do we have to find “how” it is she is now present in this crucial time in world history?  I know you may not want to go where we have not the frames of certainty, and still, I want to push - I think we need to recognize that there is this deep possibility that we all have lived before, in fact many times before, and as we enter this life, our being tries to wrestle with the questions of times past and times now that we all wake up to consciously and unconsciously in our daily life; questions out beyond the rote-finite frames of daily thought…  How it is that Sarah Palin made it to this point is a question way out beyond the context of this or any article’s writer so far… as is the question of who is Obama in world history? etc.

It is for us to sit very quietly and see if the invisible world will drop hints, will rock our minds and hearts, will speak from the deeper context of NOW. Know that certainty is not the stamp of the infinite!  Did I say infinite?

I think-feel these times are asking us more than just-being-deductive, making reason without understanding truth.  I think dialogue more so than the written word can help people pay attention to the deep impulses at work in modernity, and too, build a ground on which we all take on the task that is waiting for us to do. For me my task is finding language with “the other” whereby the invisible is given the ground in the dialectic to lift the mechanistic mind out of repetition and into becoming or better into the evolution of being human…

It is good to be out of the closet…

G

Dear Friends,

When the universe speaks loudly, I try to listen.  Please indulge me, by considering this plan.  It will make more sense to those who know that I am relentlessly new-agey, but I ask that you try it on for size, regardless of your belief system.

I recently received three emails reminding me to monitor my thoughts regarding the political opposition.

This from my favorite “channel” - Abraham Hicks :
“You can’t take sides against anything. If you would just be one who is for things, you would live happily ever after. If you could just leave the “against” part out.”

And this, from my wise and wonderful friend, Judy (thank you, Judy):
“Oh, yes! Envision Land Slide Victory with me. That’s the vision I am holding for November and the landslide of change emerging.  Obama Landslide….sing with me what is possible, not what we fear might alternatively be.”

Furthermore from Barbara Wolf of Global Meditations Network:
“Remember, when we think the same thought,
we become one consciousness.
One consciousness by many generates great energy.”

And, finally, another chilling statement from “Abraham”:
“You get what you think about, whether you want it or not”

That should be enough to halt fixation on a certain Alaskan……..

SO, my plan is to stop thinking about “them” (as best I can) and instead, to hold the vision of A LANDSLIDE OBAMA VICTORY - whenever I can, when the Palin tales get to me, in my meditation, when I’m going to sleep.  I already have found that this vision makes me feel MUCH better than thinking about the next Dark Lords………

(Sorry - this doesn’t mean that you won’t receive more rabid political emails from me - I’m SURE to backslide - but I’ll attempt to be more aware of the “tone”!)

I hope you’ll join me, and Judy (and Barack) in holding this “Obama Landslide” vision.  There’s no harm in trying - and from my experience - the Universe delivers.

If these thoughts ring true, please send them along.  The more the merrier - and the more victorious!

Obama Landslide Victory

Jane

Because of the number of your responses to our inquiry, we are posting a second blog to further the thread…and we are evolving as we go - together! Thank you, community. We welcome and invite more!

Here to continue our dialogue is a thoughtful contribution from Philip Davidson:

I share many of your reactions and frustrations at what is happening and not knowing just what to do.

One way I cope is to reacquaint myself with the reality that 70% of the people in this country are at levels of development of consciousness that emphasize literal over metaphorical, external authority over internal authority, fear over possibility, reactivity over understanding, ethnocentricity over world centricity. They are exactly where they need to be in the grand scheme of things. It is not up to us to judge them for being where they are. We can, however, work to create conditions that enable, facilitate, enhance the growth and expansion of their consciousness. In fact, that is all that we can do - - unless we choose to go backward in our own development and function as we did when we were where they are, either in this life or some other incarnation.

So what does it mean to create conditions that enable, facilitate, enhance the growth and expansion of their consciousness?  For me it means talking about my political choices in non political terms. For example, the appeal to me of Obama is not his policy positions but his willingness to listen to multiple inputs before making a decision; his capacity for treating people with dignity and respect, etc. I also readily acknowledge his shortcomings.

I talk about how it isn’t about who is right about this and wrong about that, but about describing the ways in which everyone is right about some things. (No one is wrong 100% of the time!) It is about modeling the behavior that I believe will move the country forward: higher levels of awareness and openness and less sense of knowing absolute truths. It is about showing how policies that speak to both our cultural beliefs and institutional realities are better than those that speak to only a single dimension. Policies that incorporate our sense of individuality and freedom while also addressing community and integrated interests.

Now quite admittedly, when someone is shouting her/his truth while misstating facts or being hypocritical versus earlier positions, it is pretty difficult to take a deep breath, recognize that person’s level of consciousness development and come up with things to say that are not confrontational but awareness raising.

The challenge is to redefine the game. The current game of highly partisan this or that politics is a dead end. It is a “structural conflict” in the words of Robert Fritz. The only way out is to redefine the issue at a broader perspective. For me, this is important work; more important than trying to influence individual’s votes in this election.

Dear Women (and Men!) of this Community, far and wide, yours and mine.

You who behold the truth and potential of Life with me and work every breathing moment of your life with dedication, vision, passion, clarity, courage, beauty and joy to live out that truth and potential. To be life-giving and life-affirming in all we think, say and do.

I and many like me (therefore, like you) need your help.

This morning, I woke up with E.B. White’s quote whispering softly, “I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world. This makes it hard to plan the day.”   I smiled at that. And then the phone rings and it is my newshound Brad (in Chicago) who heard that the polls show the women’s vote for Palin went up 12 points. Gone went the smile, “poof!” went the quote. HELP!  Is this the beginning of a new day for women?

So, I am asking for your help in taking me off the ledge here. What is a woman to do with this news? Over the last week, Offerings has started a blog to invite a different kind of conversation about politics — one that would be less reactive, less pejorative, less about Palin-bashing and more generative, thoughtful, fair, and impacting our planet and future in a positive and constructive way. Life-giving and life-affirming.

Today, it feels like a new day and an even more different conversation is at hand. My reactiveness (which I will own) has me challenging my own and your way of thinking about this so that we might together break into new ground. Let me share with you what has been my political diet over the last week since Sarah Palin was announced to be McCain’s running mate and candidate for VP of the United States. Not to mock, truly, but to shine light on it….that we may all respect (as in ‘re-spectre’… to re-look) where we are and see if we can see anew to a new way of thinking. One that will take me off the ledge and move us forward. Here’s what I/we have been chewing on with you over the last week:

1. Women are smarter than what the McCain campaign would make of us in choosing Palin. We voted for Hillary, but not just because she is a woman, and therefore they are wrong if they think women would just switch to the next woman to get to the top.
2. They are running a campaign of lies and of personality, not of fact and issues. We must understand the political mind of the everyday voter and learn to combine the realities of the voters’ world and the symbolism (metaphors, stories, images) of values that touch their hearts the most.
3. I have to focus all of my energy on Obama-Biden ticket and hold and meditate on the vision of the future I desire. Reading all the Palin emails will just bring me and us down a spiral energetically.
4. I am overwhelmed by the hundreds (maybe more) of emails a day being received and passed around us on the latest lies and abuse of power by Palin. But it is shared among us, telling the choir what it already knows. Now, we’re signing up on our cellphones for FACT and texting it around. How is this helping?
5. I don’t know what to do about my own — fill in the blank - parents, family, in-laws, spouse, friends, poker buddies, workmates (though we never talk about politics, I know) who have decided to vote for McCain-Palin and are enamored with Palin and refuse any other way to see it. And, to top it, what to do with my own family who have asked me to not say anything to disturb the “nice time” we are going (suppose to) to have together.
6. This vote is not about women. Don’t play the sexism card.
7. We cannot stoop down to their level and play dirty. That is not the democratic way. Have a conversation with the ones who don’t think like you….listen. See what you can learn.
8. Volunteer. Head for the battleground states. Get on the phone banks.
9. Have faith. It is always darkest before the dawn. Act from a place of love and faith and hope.
10. What if it just simply needs to get worse before it can get better? Give this country what it is going to vote for, and hope it is what will awaken the masses.

What is our role and ours to do now? Are you attending townhall meetings and dialogue circles near you? Are you reaching across the divide? Are you online to make your voices of wisdom, reflection and of dialogue be heard?

What are you learning and thinking that can shed light on this and evolve our story forward???

It is a new day for women. Rise and shine…and make your thoughts be heard. I’m waiting at the ledge here.

Yours ever,
Teresa

TO POST A COMMENT, FILL IN THE COMMENT BOX BELOW THIS MESSAGE. YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS WILL BE KEPT PRIVATE.

Dear Bro,

This may seem like a different subject, so bear with me.  After receiving the invitation from you, my brother, to join in this dialogue, my thoughts went back to a night many moons ago, after the US invaded Cambodia.

We were living in Los Altos Hills, a few blocks up from the village. The kids were still small; Rob, who figures in this story, was 7 years old.  At the time I was active in WILPF, the Women’s International League for Peace & Freedom, Stanford branch. I heard that the village was actually arming itself and an ambulance was set up in a little park in the center of town.  Stanford shut down.
I decided to take Rob on a walk to town and visit our barber shop and the beauty shop next door, each owned by men I considered ‘right-wing’ immigrants from other countries. Sure enough they had a gun.  I had shared passionate debates in the barber shop where Rob got his haircuts, one so wild that Al, the barber, kept snipping the scissors until Rob lost most of his hair.  We both paced and shouted at each other, making our points to the detriment of really hearing each other.  I loved those fights and even the customers got involved.  So, I took Rob to see what was going on in the village and we made a loop, walking into almost every store and talking with the owners and shopkeepers.  I thought Rob should see history in the making.

But then I came home and thought about what happened after witnessing first-hand the diversity of reactions and feelings about what was going on and I decided that I would invite my compadres from WILPF and the two barbers and whomever they wanted to bring. And I would get a sort of moderator, a professor of Vietnamese history from Stanford to give us background which I thought would help us focus. The point of this, I thought, should be to find a way to really hear each other.  Before I came to this “brilliant” plan, I had been thinking about how you and I were raised, at our grandfather Charlie’s knee, while he swore at political news on the radio (Gabriel Heater with his opening “There’s Good News Tonight!).  That would get Charlie going. Charlie was a socialist through and through, from his experiences in the labor unions and coal mines of Pennsylvania.  And I wondered just why the barbers were so, what I considered ‘blindly,’ crazy passionate about life in the U.S. that they would brook no criticism of the government at all.  I wondered about their boyhood stories that shaped the way they thought.

Before the evening unfolded the barbers and friends decided to back out, as I discovered via a phone call to remind them of the event.  I persuaded them to come and invited them to come early.  I had laid a table of beautiful food to go with some stellar wines and had cleaned and polished the house and garnished it with flowers. They were shocked when they saw all this because they had formed the opinion that I was some hippie mom, living in a funky handmade house in the hills.  (They told me this later; I was a hippie mom but living a little more luxuriously than they had thought.)

That night I decided I would shut up for the most part and play neutral hostess to the group, which turned out to be about 25 people.  I did make clear, though, that I wanted to dig for common ground and reach an understanding of how we had all come to our different points of view.  (Only you know how hard that would be for me - the one always wanting to make her points and ‘win’ any debate.)  To reach my point in this story more quickly I will say that the evening was a resounding success.  There were wild passionate debates, but also active listening and because of the way the evening was set up, good will went into that listening & everyone eventually stopped trying to ‘win’ the debates.  The evening went on into the wee hours of the morning and I was very touched when saying goodbye to the last stragglers — the history professor, the two barbers and a couple of WILPFers — they were embracing with big smiles while thanking me for the evening.  We heard a lot of childhood stories that night and you could pretty well track how people’s minds were shaped from their early teachings and experiences.

So wouldn’t we perhaps be thinking more like Sarah Palin if we were raised in a tiny little enclave of conservative Christians?  I, who have had an abortion in the bad old days, had my views changed by that experience.  I, who had one of my children also select to give birth to a child with Down’s Syndrome, was changed by that decision and experience. I get where she is coming from and at the same time appalled that she is anywhere near the governance of this country.  There is that side of me, the one that is still most active, that laughs like hell when my brilliant backgammon partner, a space scientist, called her “Igloo Trash” last night and the Maureen Dowd article had me in stitches.  It is McCain, though, that I am upset with, not Palin.  Who would turn down such a plum of an offer?  My nasty self continues to hope that rising scandal about her sinks her and McCain with her.

So I continue to ponder. How DO we listen to political points of view so repellent and dangerous in our view and get to a meaningful discussion?  And what might a meaningful discussion look like? What is achievable?  Are political minds changeable given the deep childhood experiences that shape them? Do we just want to be the changers of minds or are we willing to have it sometimes go the other way?

Jude

Dear All,

Teresa, thank you for kindly sending me this thread of article and conversation. I feel honored to receive the gift of everyone’s words, and more than anything, the gift in seeing just how much we, as people, as a country, care about what comes next. As I sat here thinking, and then went to check out articles on wowOwow (The Women on the Web), I thought some more. This is what I have come up with:

As the daughter of a father who does not stand up for women, yet raised me with the notion of women being equal, I do agree that men absolutely can contribute to the shift. By supporting and understanding their wives, daughters and granddaughters, when women, like Teresa, or me, have our first encounter with sexism or misogyny, we’d have a supportive environment to share our experiences, and not feel so much like its just “us,” but instead, a whole community of men and women who can hear those experiences and join beside us in demanding change and taking concrete action to support real, meaningful shifts in what we as a society allow our womenfolk to experience simply for being a woman. Often the lack of understanding, and missing solidarity by men in my life, was the second slap in the face.

Yet, as a voter, I feel strongly that Ken has hit it on the head. It is really up to women to start treating each other better, and to not be “brainless” when it comes to the discussions we are going to have about Sarah Palin. Sorry, but I feel that word is apt given the last eight years. To me, we will be brainless as voters if we even get carried away in a big discussion and debate about the merits of Sarah Palin. Merits as a woman, mother and wife, ok. She has them. Yet, as a candidate, there were far more experienced and dedicated public servants passed over for the slot which is the same type of thing that happens in the workplace every day. Are we, as men and women, supposed to say this is ok? Even more insulting is the position for which she was chosen, its importance to our nation. We should not have to face the choice of such an inexperienced public servant. Sorry, but VP Nominee Palin has not even achieved significant accolades for the positions she has occupied. For us, as women, Republican, Dem, or not, to allow such an inexperienced candidate to merit further discussion says we are still willing to be brainless about what we waste our breath on. If we want to talk about our misogynistic society, o.k. Yet, to debate Palin’s qualifications is as nonsensical as claiming a man running for president is unpatriotic. Its a waste of our time, and I believe Ken is right in pointing out, as Hurricane Gustav heads for New Orleans, we are at a critical moment. We must be “mindful” and not “brainless.” I don’t think we have time for it anymore. We are going to have to shape the debate and stop letting spin masters control us by feeding us mindless debate and conversation. Ask yourself, if she were a man, would you vote for him given the level of experience?

Just my two cents, with total respect to Teresa and her circle. Thank you Teresa for sharing with me the practice your family has developed in being “mindful.” I wish my own family could come together in that way.

Blessings,
Catherine

I have taken the liberty — no, the honored role — of sharing here with you an email conversation that ensued between Ken M. and Dianne J. after I sent out the article about Sarah Palin written by Ruth Rosen. (See below)

I am sharing this with you because (a) K & D have each indicated a willingness to share their exchange; (b) it is a thread of conversation that is one of the most critical to our society’s evolution today but is not available in many corners of this country, let alone the world; (c) I want to honor the state of being that each of them is in as they write out their authentic reactions and responses with each other. Mostly because at this oh-so-critical time in our shared lives and shared worlds, it is more necessary than ever before to be in dialogue about such matters in the authentic, reflective, responsible, challenging (to self- and other), and thoughtful way that Ken and Dianne have started here….and, and, and (d) because we need more than ever each other to reveal to ourselves (individually and collectively) what is running us… i.e., what motivations, perceptions, hurts, fears, biases, and automatic ways we think that  left unnoticed, unacknowledged & unexplored  will be the unseen directors of our decisions and actions…our votes. I have to note that in one of Ken’s email signatures was this appropriate quote: “A prejudice is a principle [or belief] that its owner does not intend to examine.” - Wallace Stegner

Before Dianne sent out her response to Ken, she called me up to talk through whether or not she would send it as she did not personally know Ken and she wanted to get my sense about it given that I had sent the initial email to people in my community. The answer to me was easy and joyful as I know Ken and I know this community and I rejoice in the ability of its members to come to the edge of our own unknowing and our own unconsciousness to reveal — without attack nor shaming — what is not only true of us in the moment, but also what might be emerging as a greater and more valuable truth that can only be revealed together and in dialogue among a group of independent and open-to-learning thinkers.

As for me, personally, reading their email dialogue opened and stirred in me — not for the first time - many of my own underlying questions, discomforts and confusion around a presidential race that has included women at center stage as never before. This from a woman who in 1986 moved to this country and whose first awakening to sexism happened in one of my first jobs in an American corporation when a young male director of Marketing said that I looked really pretty in what I was wearing. No, it wasn’t this remark that taught me of the concept of sexism, it was the comments of my women colleagues who had overheard his comment to me and came to me saying that I should be incensed that he, male and of higher-rank, would make such a comment, leaving me completely confused and upset. I’ve been working myself out of that confusion ever since through my women’s circles, in my DNA of Relationship dialogue circle with other women and men, and in listening to my own personal experiences. And, I have been working it since Hillary Clinton signed up for the primaries as I’ve watched myself hesitate to have comments I hear matter to me — or run me - without question.

I realize that the self and collective dialogue has just gotten escalated by the nomination of another woman Sarah Palin for nomination to Vice Presidency of the United States. I know I do not agree with her stands around the environment, women’s rights, the war, and other huge issues, and therefore my vote for Obama-Biden is stronger, clearer and more easy to make. At the same time, I am also aware of my confusion rising again as I hear comments about Sarah Palin’s looks or her own being a “hockey mom” or her token place in her party (as I felt that old confusion rise when comments were made about whether Hillary cried for real or not or was too aggressive or was carrying the Clinton dynasty).

I know I have far to go in this inquiry as, like Ken and Dianne, I know there is always always so much more to learn. I am up for the task. So, thank you Dianne and thank you, Ken for opening and moving forward this possibility of a more thoughtful, honest and conscious dialogue among us about women and men and each of our roles and responsibilities in evolving our humanity and society together. May this way of exchange and reflection of thinking increase out into more and more circles and perhaps one day into the national and international stage.

Finally, here is their email exchange. Enjoy, reflect, savor, jump into the frey, or take the conversation where you will…

With love, deep appreciation and honor of you in my life and for this time in our lives,
Teresa

P.S. - Every first Sunday of the month, my parents who are in the Philippines and siblings across the country (and our partners) get on a family Skype call where we are learning together how to converse around issues of the day. The last one we had was on the legalization gay marriage. My father who is very true Roman Catholic expressed his discomfort about this but he then listened carefully to all the other sentiments, statistics, opinions from my mother and others. I’m not sure if or how it moved him  – we are still needing to learn how to process or reflect on the conversation — but just having the conversation we did and will have in the future buoyed my belief in the potential of a different way to think and realize together. (“Sexism” will be a very interesting one, to be sure!)

And now, the article and the ensuing email conversation:
“Sarah Palin and Feminists for Life” was written by Ruth Rosen (Posted on AlterNet on August 30, 2008. You can click on the article title to see the entire text.) The article is about the new candidate for VP and her very active membership with an organization called Feminists for Life, which as Ms. Rosen explains, “tries to convince young women that choice means giving up the right to ‘choose.’” In her research of the organization and interview with Serrin Foster, president of Feminists for Life, she found out that their idea of the “right to choose”, was to persuade young women not that they had a choice, but that they were to “choose to bear a baby”. And that, Rosen adds, “it cleverly appropriates the words “feminist” and “choice” to convince young women that abortion is always an unacceptable choice.” The article goes on to write about the inexperience of Sarah Palin and about Sen. John McCain’s choice of her as running mate to be about ideology and not competence; and about attracting the female vote by simply throwing in a female candidate, no matter what her level of comptence and experience may be. (Ruth Rosen is a historian and journalist who teaches public policy at UC Berkeley. She is a senior fellow at the Longview Institute.)
————————————————————-

From: Ken
Thanks, Teresa. My feelings exactly. Sarah Palin, John McCain and George Bush are all birds of a feather, even though the plumage may vary. It scares me to think that there may be enough brainless and/or prejudiced voters out there for them to win this election. I hold it as a matter of life and death. We lost 8 years with King George. Four more and we are road kill.

It’s a delicate business to expose Sarah for what she is. If Obama & Co. attack her, it would backfire, even if true. It will be up to the women to take care of this, especially Hillary, since she set up the problem and since the Republicans are using her name in presenting Sarah. Barbara Boxer has taken this on, but who else? And it may be too soon to even ask, but my mind goes to “Where is Hillary?”

Help! all you women out there. Us men are mostly helpless on this issue.

Ken
“A prejudice is a principle [or belief] that its owner does not intend to examine.” - Wallace Stegner

From: Dianne
Ken,
Like you, I appreciated receiving this article via Teresa. I have no quarrel with the ideas and perspective set forth by Ruth Rosen, the article’s author, as she did field research about Feminists for Life and Serrin Foster to ground her deconstruction and arguments, and for the most part owns her “lens’ or perspective. Also I appreciated your taking the time to respond to it and including us all in the dialogue.

That said, I’m going to offer you some feedback. I’m not including the whole group on my response to you but if you want, feel free to open to the conversation this conversation to the whole group. I’m only cc’ing Teresa who is the only person in the whole group that I actually know besides Stephanie Ryan.

First, I find your language in the 1st paragraph is unnecessarily polarizing in terms of political affiliations. “Brainless and prejudiced voters”? Please. How is this respecting and tending the diversity of perspective among us? Those words are insulting to anyone in this upcoming close election who may choose to vote differently than you might want or expect – which, right at this given moment of our closely contested national elections, may be about 50% of the American population.

Tending respectfully to the diversity of political perspective among us is the delicate business at hand.

However, instead you relegate that phrase “delicate business” to your second paragraph about “exposing” Sarah Palin for “what she is”.

So, secondly, I find your comments in the second paragraph to be unnecessarily polarizing in terms of gender but you go on further: “It will be up to women to take care of this, especially Hillary, since she set up the problem…” Please. And “Help! all you women out there. Us men are mostly helpless on this issue.” Please.

Your works, your languaging, lands in me as: a) objectifying, and b) essentially rife with sexism.

Certainly men and we women have been socialized to be passive bystanders in the face of sexism, and I actually think this conditioning is reflected your language here.

However, choosing helplessness is actually capitulating to socially-sanctioned passive bystanding, and it is not your only possible choice. As a male bystander you actually have numerous options, most of which carry no risk of personal injury, harmful economic ramifications, or loss of male privilege. You and those you name as “us men” are embedded in the same American society and culture as we women. You may even be in relationships with women who might in some way be experiencing the oppression of sexism on a day-to-day basis. There are many opportunities for action, and you men can actually move into a empowered bystanding or powerful “standing beside” position. Think about.

I send this message to you because I personally believe diversity is an asset, and its appreciation does not necessarily happen by chance but is arrived at by cultivating a critical habit of mind (including perceptions, attitudes, assumptions, and beliefs) and attention to the links among power, privilege, prejudice, and oppression.

Sincerely,
~ Dianne

From: Ken

Thank you, Dianne. Your email is well received and worth a lot of my thought. While your interpretation of my words is different from my interpretation, it woke me up to the fact that we each read the same language through different lenses and I am guilty of forgetting that in my passion. When in the business world a few decades ago, I discovered the value of having strong and brave people like you tell me how people from a particular cultural background would interpret what I said. Their comments impressed me and led me to form a “Minority and Women’s Advisory Group” of volunteers to edit my comments and give me advice before launching them. It was very helpful and I see I still need them. I erred in not thinking through how other cultures might interpret what I said and getting some other opinions. Instead, I just followed my gut and said what I thought in the moment and I apologize if that disturbed you.

My comment of “Brainless and prejudiced voters” was not well thought out, even though I was not referring to Republicans but to voters as a whole. It is what I really think and I believe true in that many voters, enough to change an election, do not bother to study the backgrounds of the candidates and think through the consequences. If they did, many of the elections would have turned out differently and I think this is a big problem, especially now when the future of the human species is at stake. Nevertheless, I should have given my expression of such comments more care. I should know better because I have been active in the cause of minorities and women for a very long time.

Secondly, I have voted both Republican and Democrat in the past and feel that both parties have a lot to answer to. It is not the choice of a party that bothers me, it’s the consequences of their policies and actions. And “exposing Sarah Palin” was referring to her beliefs and lack of the experience that is required of a potential President, not because she is a woman. My comments would not have changed if the choice had been a man with the same qualities. Also, I didn’t say “helpless”. I said “mostly helpless”, which I believe reflect the political reality right now. If I felt I or other men were totally helpless, I wouldn’t have responded to Teresa’s email in the first place.

I also strongly believe that diversity is an asset. It is not just in my head; it is in my gut, the same gut that let my passions flow a little too quickly in my email. But sometimes the head needs to be called in to provide a little balance.

If you or Teresa wish to include others in this conversation, I have no objection. I didn’t do so because I don’t want to divert the conversation from Teresa’s original intent, adding only Sarita’s name as she is my wife and teacher and soulmate. But if it’s useful to do so, it’s fine with me. I do appreciate your sensitivity to my feelings in sending it only to me and Teresa but I can take a public scolding when I need one, such as in this case. I’ll leave that up to you and Teresa as to whether sending to others is useful or not.

Thank you for taking the time and energy to send your well-considered message.

Ken

———————————–
“The basis for truly great leadership is love.”