Friday, March 17, 2017

Thoughts on the gender revolution

Dear friends,
If you follow me on Facebook, you've probably noticed that I am linking to a lot of pieces about gender, especially topics that have to do with women's rights and the emerging understanding that gender is a spectrum.  Many of you who know me, know that this topic has been a reading and thinking obsession of mine for a long time.  All the way back from when I first read the Diary of Anne Frank as a girl, through the years I spent hiding out at the Schlesinger Library at Radcliffe researching the history of the Pill and the women who demanded it be reformulated for safety reasons, to founding Shine on Collaborative, a coaching organization whose primary concern is women's contributions and well being--the experience of gender has fascinated me.  And it's humbled me by its complexity.

You've probably already noticed that we are in the middle of a sea change in the universe of gender.  The Trump administration has and will put up road blocks to stop it, but in a way, these road blocks are amplifying the felt sense of what is afoot.

National Geographic calls this a Gender Revolution, and I agree with this characterization.  By the time our children or maybe grandchildren are adults, there will be pockets in the world, mostly cities, in which gender will look completely different than what we have known up until now.  The feelings I have about this alternate between, excitement for what may be one of the most important cultural shifts in my lifetime, fury in the face of extreme conservative backlash against progress for any of the non-dominant genders, fear for the safety of the individuals whose lives are lighting the way forward, but who may not be in friendly territory, and sometimes also exhaustion--because change is hard, and finding the right words and concepts to describe what's emerging requires real effort.

I'm writing this post for friends and family whose day-to-day might be on the periphery of this revolution, who may think something like, "boy and girl was good enough for us, why do we need all these other special labels?"  And to remind myself that, yes, we need to keep moving forward, even though it will take a lot of work to reinvent say, a language that takes into account that he/his and she/hers categorizes individuals in a way that at times is unnecessary and at other times is not specific enough.

I'll start with a narrow set of facts.  High school biology teaches us that biological sex falls into two neat genetic categories, XY or XX.  Jogging your memory here, you learned that if your karyotype is XY, your phenotype will be male and that if your karyotype is XX then your phenotype will be female. To be specific the main physical details consulted to determine your phenotype were your private parts, and assigning you a gender did not take into account any other physical evidence about your brain, your endocrine system, your kidneys or any of other difficult to measure physical trait that tends to correlate with whether you are XX or XY. 

Also not covered in that 9th grade unit on genetics and biological sex is the fact that other combinations of sex chromosomes can and do result in viable human beings.  We know for sure that X, XXY, XYY, XXX and XXXY all occur with varying frequency within the human family.  And they are not that uncommon.  XXY is thought to occur in as many as 1 in 500 people.  The current guesstimate is that XXX and XYY both occur in about 1 in 1,000 people.  But even then, many people with these less typical chromosomal combinations don't know about their own genetic difference, which means we have a limited understanding of how often these combinations occur.  At the very least based on the estimates available, simple math leads to the conclusion that among the billions of human beings on the planet, there are millions of people alive today whose biological sex does not conform to a binary gender rubric.

Let that sink in for a minute.  The two neat categories of male and female are inaccurate in the most fundamental way.

And this is just the beginning of the biological confusion.  There are other worlds of information that describe the interactions between hormones and the brain that also have considerable impact on the categories of male and female.  And that does not even begin to address the way social narratives have attached themselves to physical bodies.  There are many aspects to the complexity of gender, but for today, I want to be clear about one thing--the concept of binary gender is wrong, and a single focus on sex chromosomes should be enough to convince any of us that gender as a category deserves a revolution.

Scientists discovered these other genetic sex variations in the late 1950's as a result of new developments in genetic research methods.  But when these types were discovered, they were classified not as new separate sex categories, but as twists on male and female.  Usually these twists were considered poorer versions of male or female, but in the case of XYY, there was a brief spell around 1968 in which a big deal was made about the arrival of the "super male"--someone who was extra macho, and alternatively might be more likely to end up serving time for criminal violence, or might end up a hero, as suggested by the main character in the novel called XYY Man (just ordered it on Amazon to have a peek) in which an XYY guy named Scottie finds his skills as a cat burglar in high demand with the British Secret service.   There's that social narrative piece.  I find myself here both laughing and cringing.


My education has trained me to pursue clarity, and that confusion in any realm, but especially in the realm of gender and identity, is a bad thing.  I've often felt internal pressure to know what side of an argument I believe or agree with, I've wanted to have big thoughts about how to "fix" the problems of gender, I've wanted to know for sure one way or another whether my thinking about gender or my performance of my own gender is good or right.  

But lately I've been wondering whether or not this need to "know," to pin down the facts, and to be good, correct, and right, is in itself a culturally gendered way of thinking, or if not gendered exactly, a traditional way of thinking that is getting in the way of experiencing the complexity of the situation.  But this is especially hard because not knowing, in the case of gender is extra vulnerable.  In some cases not having the right words for who you are or the most accurate words to demand your right to personal safety can be a matter of life or death.  

Still, Rebecca Solnit, Virginia Woolf, Pema Chodron, Lydia Yuknavich and all the thinkers who encourage getting comfortable with uncertainty are my coaches these days.  I wear their words like a team uniform, a way of belonging to the crew that is doing their work out in the dark every day, feeling around for new languages (thinking of Yuknavich's book Chronology of Water) or pushing the old one to do new tricks (I'm thinking o here of Kristi Yamaguchi and her triple lutz, triple toe, or Michelle Kwan and her seven triple jumps in '88). 

Here are some passages of Solnit that describe what I'm talking about:

"We know less when we erroneously think we know than when we recognize that we don't.  Sometimes I think these pretenses at authoritative knowledge are failures of language:  the language of bold assertion is simpler, less taxing, than the language of nuance and ambiguity and speculation."

"My own task these past twenty years or so of living by words has been to try to find or make a language to describe the subtleties, the incalculables, the pleasures and meanings--impossible to categorize--at the heart of things...The tyranny of the quantifiable is partly the failure of language and discourse to describe more complex, subtle, and fluid phenomena, as well as the failure of those who shape opinions and make decisions to understand and value these slipperier things.  It is difficult, sometimes even impossible, to value what cannot be named or described, and so the task of naming and describing is an essential one in any revolt against the status quo..."

So for all of us who find the long lists of genders on college forms confusing or tiresome, my request is that we stick with it.  We are learning so much all at once and it will be years before the everyday language can hold the complexity of what we are learning about the reality of gender.  My hope is that we can be creative and empathetic through the learning process.

At this point, I also look back to the half-marathon I ran with my friend Laurel in 2013.  To call us amateur runners would have been generous since we hardly thought of ourselves as runners at all.  The night before the race we got together with my friend Katherine McIntyre who asked us what our plan was for getting through the 13 miles (our longest run had been 7, I think).  And we had none.  At that point she suggested we put our selves in a 5 minute run-2 minute walk pattern.  She had a lot more experience, which was enough to convince us to avail ourselves of her advice.

During the race, I learned that the most difficult part of the first half of the race was keeping to the pattern.  I felt like a horse chomping against the bit every time we had to slow ourselves down to walk.  The thought bubble that popped above my head then was "refraining is the most difficult task."  It was one of those moments when life and metaphor happen at the same time.  My body was doing the motions of a perspective that is increasingly difficult to hold in a fast paced world.  I was forcing myself to walk when I wanted badly to run.

It ended up for the best.  In that last mile, we were both spent and hardly made it across the finish line.  If we had not saved our energy, we would not have made it.  On the topic of gender, as well as all of the other political topics that are in such flux right now, having a plan for pacing and sticking to it, feels right to me, along with finding ways to be in a state of productive uncertainty.  And by pacing, I'm meaning pacing around the language and making room for some level of confusion, while at the same time holding sturdy vigilance for everyone's right to safety, to free circulation in their environment, to love and be loved.

In the meantime, if you meet someone whose gender you do not know and you need to find out what pronoun to use when talking to them, there is a simple polite formula for how to proceed.  You say, "Hi, my name is Cristina. What's your name?"  Then they might say, "I'm Jordan."  Then you can say, "Nice to meet you Jordan.  The pronouns I use are she/her.  What do you use?"

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Happy International Women's Day

What I know "for sure" about being a woman is unfinished. 

I do know gender impacts your personal safety, how likely you are to live in poverty, what kinds of jobs feel within reach, and whether or not you feel entitled to voice your most passionate perspectives.  We will need International Women's Day for a good long time to come, and we'll need it to do its job for all the genders.  

And I do know I love being a woman, which feels like more of a paradox everyday.  It's like this:

warm body late night  
bath bubbles buzz
lip stick sweet cream 
hips, hips, hips, 
spinning like tops 
hiding diamonds 
in praise
of flowers and tulle
and the twelve signs
whispering steady streams
of warning and love


These good things I learned from my mother.  The rest I learned from being a mother. Mothering is the kind of bowl that is bigger than the brain, you know, that can see the wrong things and love the things, and get up every morning hugging and fighting at the same time and not fall apart. 

Which is not to put mothering on a pedestal, but to say that a maternal perspective, one in which one person works on behalf of another less powerful person, or one in in which taking care, not optimizing, maximizing, or winning, is the primary motivation, gives life, encouraging tiny green shoots of goodness to make their way up through the cracks of impossibilities.

Happy International Women's Day.

Monday, February 13, 2017

My friend Nancy's term "inner patriot"

My friend Nancy is awesome.  She has coined the term "inner patriot."  She and my friend Brette have also sent me this care package of ice cream.  That makes them both super awesome.

Hi all,

I have not yet posted in 2017.  It is as if there is too much on my mind to even get out a few sentences.  But I thought for today I'd just post a couple of simple things:

I'm worried. 

--Continuing to employ a staffer blatantly plugged a private business interest.
--Then the following two days using the POTUS twitter account to continue to plug the family business by using it as a location to entertain foreign dignitaries.
--Calling that business on the POTUS twitter feed, "the Winter White House."

Here is a quote from The Standards of Ethical Behavior for Employees of the Executive Branch iIssued by the US Office Of Government Ethics

"(7) Employees shall not use public office for private gain.
(8) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual."

These above actions were against the law in the case of the staffer, and against the spirit of the law in the case of POTUS.

Meanwhile to call protesters

"professional anarchists, thugs and paid protesters" 

when protesting is not only our right, but written into the first amendment of the constitution, is wrong.  

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

It is worrisome.

To my good friends who find these times overwhelming, and overly negative.  Please, stay tuned.  Do not fall into confusion or paralysis.  We are called on to peaceably redress our grievances.  I know you are not accustomed to being in the fight.  I know you want to take a break or for all of this to go away.  But history tells us, this falling asleep or falling back is how we lose our democracy.  For those of us who have had the good luck to have enjoyed the privilege of straightforward citizenship in the form of whiteness, perhaps a Christian identity, a decent education, food on the table every night, etc. that privilege has kept us on the sidelines for a very long time.  We have maybe even believed that our voice doesn't matter.  It does.  Do not fall into overwhelm.  Do whatever you need to do to say energized to  call your Members of Congress everyday.   In the past other good Americans have correctly criticized our government, and they have left us a legacy of clear instruction.  Peaceful non-violent resistance.  We can do this.  We are doing this.  

When I feel tired of all this, which is a lot, I call on that resource Nancy has dubbed our "inner patriot."  I love this phrase.  Our inner patriots will never tire.  Our inner patriots do not belong to a party, they belong to the cause of functioning democratic ideals.  Our inner patriots know that to plug a personal business from an official government office is wrong, our inner patriots know that it is a startling departure from historic norms for a president to refuse transparency around their tax record.  Our inner patriots believe that real facts exist and that it is our job to find sources that report them.  Our inner patriots believe that our elected officials work on our behalf, and we contact them regularly to express our opinions.  Our inner patriots insist on robust electoral process, on the checks and balances built into the government, and on mutual respect between citizens.  Our inner patriots make the calls.  Our inner patriots have heroes and call on them regularly through reading, prayer, channeling and petitioning in real life and in spirit.  Our inner patriots are timeless.  We practice knowing that every moment is urgent and that clocks and calendars do not measure our timeline.

One of my heroes lately has been Rebecca Solnit author of Hope in the Dark.

"When I think back to why I was apolitical into my mid-twenties I see that being politically engaged means having a sense of your own power--that what you do matters--and a sense of belonging, things that cameto me only later and that do not come to all."

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Tenzo: A poem

January 31, 2017

The cook has always known the flame.

"Do not burn the butter," she says.
"Or else the alarm will sound and
we will not be able to eat the eggs."

Thursday, December 22, 2016

The Shortest Day

My shoulders slumped a little as I walked out of the salon last Thursday.  I didn't like my hair cut. The blonde fell in smooth strands, a little bang whisked across my brow.  I couldn't put a finger on what I didn't like.  But when I got home that evening my tween daughter put it in simple terms.  "Mom, it's a bob."  She squinted her eyes a little and elaborated.  "Actually, its a little bit shorter than usual.  It's not just a bob--it's a mom-bob."  Of course it was.  I was a mom with a smooth blown out bob, a mom-bob is what I had for hair.  I didn't love it, but was mildly resigned to it.  Something about me with a mom-bob made sense, not to my internal story of myself, mind you, but to my understanding of the world beyond me, to the people who look at me and think of me in a certain way.  I think to them I am a mostly a mom, and for me to have a mom-bob would make a certain kind of sense.

Because I'm a mom of a certain age, who still has blonde hair, a haircut does not finish it off for me.  The next day I had my second hair appointment of the month--for the color.  By last Friday my roots were showing about an inch and a half, damning evidence that I had missed the previous appointment.  My colorist hates it when I do this.  It makes her job of making my hair look natural more difficult.  I've spent the last three years or so threatening to give up the color, but pretty much everyone I know--my kids, my hairdresser, my colorist, everyone, is staunchly against my going gray--and in the end, I suppose for now I'm with them.  I'm not that interested in looking older these days, which must be some kind of sign that I've grown up, because I can remember the days of wanting to look older than I actually was.  And beyond all that I've not been able to calculate the logistics of letting it go gray.  Do I cut it off and then grow it out?  Do I tough out the year of hair half gray half blonde?  That's usually where my thoughts on gray stop and I book the next three hour appointment.

For the first time at this particular appointment, I ran into a male friend getting his color done.  Do you acknowledge this?  Is it outing him somehow to say hello?  For years friends have streamed through the salon during the three hour appointment, and we've covered, children, marriage, the state of the nation, all with our hair foiled up into wild looking techno manes.  But the men had never joined us here.  So that was a new.  I decided on texting him to let him know I was there, so when we ended up sitting next to each other in the blow dry line it was a little less awkward, I like to think.

While I sat next to my guy friend, a twenty-something male stylist with blue ear plugs and black doc martens blew out my freshly blonded mom-bob.  Smooth, straight, pretty.  It was a haircut that was hard to argue with, because it didn't look bad.  But in the course of the three hours in the chair, not only had I seen my first male friend come in an cover up his gray, but I had also read Megan Mayhew Bergman's essay, The Long and Pretty Goodbye.  In it she catalogued some of the most effective elegiac writing of the year, including an article about the sudden thinning of the giraffe population in Africa.  In thirty years the giraffe population has fallen from 157,000 to 97,000, slipping from the list of animals around which there is little concern into the list of species vulnerable to extinction.  

Learning about the declining giraffe population pierced me in a new way, as if there had not in the last few months been enough disillusion and disappointment.  Eloise, our almost seven year old, is a self-proclaimed giraffe-girl.  In a family where gender is fluid and up for discussion, Eloise claims giraffe-middle as her gender essence.  It's about the eyes for her, and I can't argue.  Both she and giraffes share a fringed wide-eyedness that makes an undeniable impression, and she claims the kindred spirit any way that she can.  It is not uncommon for me to pick her up from first grade to find her wearing her giraffe horn head band.  She draws giraffes.  She dreams of giraffes.  She has decorated her room with giraffe artwork and a collection of giraffe stuffies that range in size from over five feet tall to four inches short.  Each has it's own gender-middle name:  Jingles, Beau, Sparkle, and on and on. I cannot hold the full catalog in my head.  Eloise asks me almost every week, "When can I visit the giraffes in Africa?"  

From my seat in the salon I foresee a slow train wreck of heartbreak that I could not prevent.  With zero hope in my heart, I sign up, from the salon chair, to become a member of the Giraffe Conservation Foundation.  I don't research or dig deeper to find out if it's a good organization.  I just plug my credit card in one more time, because it is the only thing I can do, not to ward off disaster, but to ward off a kind of personal shutdown, a way of not allowing myself to give in to the helpless feeling that lingers at the edge of everyday these days.  As the sad feeling descends once again, this time weighted down even heavier by the visceral feel of my daughter's heartbreak alongside my own, I force myself to also understand it as the seed of hope, to see the wide view that these feelings of sadness as the underside of our love for so much that is both within and beyond our grasp.

The last time I felt sadness like this was when my friend Brett was in a biking accident and almost died.  The doctors did not think he would live and they predicted that if he did he would not come close to a full recovery.  He had been biking across country and ended up in a hospital in Joplin, Missouri.  His wife, his children and a few close friends flew out to be with him and make their hope manifest in person which seems almost always to be the most important thing.  I was not at the inner circle of this tragedy, but at the next rim.  I was very sad and would find myself crying at odd times and in odd places, feeling sort of stuck and helpless in Palo Alto.  But eventually I came to the idea that my sadness would help nothing.  That though I felt sad, that sad feeling had to serve as a call to notice what it felt like to be alive and well, to be able to walk, to be able to hug my kids, it had to be a call to joy of some kind, since I myself was not debilitated.  This was hard to remember, so I streaked my hair with pink as a reminder.  Every time I looked in the mirror I was reminded of a certain basic joy of just being, the kind of joy that is often easy for me to overlook.

Similarly, I decided just feeling despair about the giraffes, and the election, and the single sex bathrooms in North Carolina would not help anything, and that I had no room in my life for resignation to things that did not suit me--like that mom-bob.  So  I texted with my hairdresser to say that the cut was good looking enough, but wasn't working for me.  He texted me back to say, "Let's make it fierce,"  which felt just about right.  As he snipped away years of hair, my one fear was for what the girls would say.  

People who have known me a long time, know that the short-haired feminist is always on hand, even if you can't see her.  But the girls had never seen me that way before.  Chloe had told me a dozen times when I had thought about cutting my hair short before that she did not like the idea, that to her mind, "You won't look like my mother anymore."  I also realized that the whole world that has grown up around these daughters of mine has only ever seen me with long blonde hair.  It was strange to realize, since I know myself in so many other ways, but this group of people I love, this group of people who are my everyday, has only ever known me with long hair.

For me, short hair is a sign that a new adventure is starting.  I had my hair short when I left for summer camp for the first time, when I started boarding school, and when I moved to California.  These were all the most formative moments of my life.  It seems just right to me that as I start my MFA, at this particular moment in time, that another adventure is beginning.  In each adventure, I can see that a set of questions was rising to the top--beginning with:  who am I and who is my tribe, and then who am I and how will I take care of myself, and now as I head to writing school the question is a little bit who am i (though so much less than in school and upon arriving in California) combined with how can I help?  Though there is likely nothing more practically useless than an art degree, I am becoming a student again to ask the question, how can my writing help.  

And just as a final note in the darkest time of the year, I offer these couple of quotes that have helped me this month.  Because though writing is impractical in so many senses, other people's writing, more than almost anything else, has been my lifelong solace.  To all the writers out there who are doing their thing to offer their best effort, I am grateful.  And to Rebecca Solnit, I know I am not alone in gratitude for Hope in the Dark, a book that found me the day before the election and which I read cover to cover in just a few hours.

"Resistance is first of all a matter of principle and a way to live, to make yourself one small republic of unconquered spirit.  You hope for results but you don't depend on them."

"Joy doesn't betray but sustains activism.  And when you face a politics that aspires to make you fearful, alienated and isolated, joy is a fine initial act of insurrection."

And to Lidia Yuknavich thank you for the continuing encouragement to "Try everything."  

Happy New Year everyone.  May the return of the light stoke your joy.

With love,

Monday, November 14, 2016

The hard work of tolerance

On Friday November 11th the San Jose Mercury News reported that Frank Navarro had been removed from his history classroom for making a comparison between Trump's rhetoric and Hitler's.  

On Sunday I attended a group gathering that was called an Election Shiva, because, as has been pointed out, many of us are in grief.  The topic of Frank Navarro's removal came up.  And the group looked at one another and asked, what do we do about that?  It does not feel right?  But should schools take a political perspective?  What should we do?  Everyone looked at one another.  I wanted to say something, but at that time didn't.  It seemed that what I had to say felt complicated, or that if I opened my mouth I might say it with too much emotion so that it could arouse more emotion, and I did not want that.  But here is what I wanted to say.  It is my response to the silencing of a teacher.

We are all in difficult times right now and emotions are running high.  No matter who we voted for, there is hurt all around.  The stories of bigotry, of who is and is not a bigot, are swirling.  That our republic suffers the vestiges of slavery cannot be denied.  That some Americans are learning for the first time that the American Dream is not equally distributed is also true, though many among us have known this for generations.  Many bodies are suddenly less safe than they were last week.

Hurt and fear threaten to close the aperture for conversation or in some cases, like in my own family, have closed it already.  However, contact is important, however painful it may be.  And by contact I do not necessarily mean agreement and I am aware that even this, contact, may be something that not everybody is ready for.  Yet, at school especially, our communities must cling to first principles of democracy, one of them being, freedom of speech.  No voice may be silenced.

Tolerance in an environment in which everyone agrees does not test the principle of tolerance.  It is when there are multiple perspectives that the practice of tolerance is forged.  It is not easy work.  In this case, organizations, like schools, owe it to their communities to be clear about their values of inclusion and freedom of expression.  All bodies must feel safe.  That is, in a tolerant community it is not permissible for someone to fear physical harm because of their perspective or their identity.  Similarly, all voices have a place.  No voice may be silenced and no individual voice may be amplified to drown out other voices.

With respect to a teacher, that voice already has power associated with it.  I believe the responsibility of the school is to guarantee safe space for its students, and in the case of history, to provide the appropriate resources for history students to grapple with the known facts of the past, knowing, of course, that those facts are always delivered from a point of view.  This is part of the study of history--to learn that who gets to tell the story has a big impact on the story that is told.  

In a tolerant community I think it is normalization of silencing to remove a teacher from their post for presenting historical facts from a particular point of view.  It is urgent that we resist this kind of silencing at this time.  Instead, it is preferable in a tolerant community to invite other voices into a conversation, to empower students to grapple with varying points of view.  This is the study of history.  Removing a teacher from their post is silencing.  They are very different approaches.

Similarly, I was impressed this week by John Palfrey, Head of School at Andover who, on Wednesday delivered an excellent All School Meeting Address in response to the election and with regard to what is expected of the Andover community, knowing that diversity is a cornerstone of that school's mission.  In response to his address, a trustee offered an alternate perspective that he would have given as the community address.  And here's the thing, Palfrey, though he respectfully disagreed with the trustee's position, he distributed  the perspective to the Andover community as well.  Offering alternative perspectives, respectful listening, and maintaining contact even in the midst of fierce disagreement is difficult work.  But defending the ability to do so is urgent work for maintaining the fabric of our republic.

Follow up.  School districts have the right to restrict what is being taught in their schools.  Public school teachers' rights to freedom of speech are shaped by their role as employees of the school district.  In this case it is the Superintendent's duty to oversee the school's curriculum.  The Superintendent has the power to declare what is and is not an appropriate presentation to a high school history class post-election.  Knowing this, it is our job to implore our school leadership to make clear their commitment to teaching tolerance as part of our public school curriculum.  Here is the ACLU information that details the public speech rights of public school teachers:

ACLU information regarding teachers right to speech.

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

What does it mean today?

Last night I dreamt that I was caught in a train station during war time.  It was night, and I was trying to buy five tickets to get out.  A long armed robot was in the station picking people off, it caught a whiff of me and because I smelled like vanilla it chased me down into a corner.  It was going to kill me, but it did not because I offered it a vanilla cookie I had made.

Many of you have now read my most recent essay, "I'm Not Really a Waitress" over at the Roar Sessions.  Most of you have been exposed to me giving Trump Tower the finger.  And if you read the piece, you know that I was p*&$y grabbed on the subway, and until I heard that this had happened to others, anger eluded me, only to erupt when I woke up to the fact that this kind of behavior is widespread.  In the piece I grapple with my anger and its expression.  I behave rudely in public for the first time in my life, and then struggle with violent thoughts in the privacy of my own writing space.  

I ended the piece with no easy answers.  There was no wrapping it up cleanly.  It was published on November 7th.

Since writing the piece I have continued to think about why my anger laid fallow for so long, and one thought I have had was this.  Diminishing its meaning, filing the experience as an odd-one off that took nothing from me was a survival strategy.  It was a way of keeping the reality of my vulnerability as a woman on the streets of New York City at bay. 

Because the other side of my anger, I understand there to be grief and fear regarding the primal vulnerability of my body, which, in the end, is the primal vulnerability of all bodies.  To have acknowledged that in my twenties would have been difficult, near impossible really wth living in the city and needing to make my way as a young woman.  And in part was possible because while my body is in its way vulnerable, it's less vulnerable than most. 

In my essay I go on to share with readers a disturbing rage fantasy, which I included because I felt it said something important about a universal violent impulse that lives in consciousness as a primitive reaction to realized vulnerability.  When you encounter folks in grief after the election, it is grief over this primal vulnerability, especially of black bodies, brown bodies, bodies of women and others who have mostly skirted on the fringes of power over the course of history, and the accompanying fear that these bodies are now more vulnerable than ever.

Anger is a healthy response to the violation of bodies, but what I want to refine and commit to continue to refine here on my blog and in all my writing, is the process of being with anger, such that it becomes a workable force that bends the arc of history toward justice, especially in the forms of safety and inclusion for a diverse community of people.  I do not regret my anger, but also understand it to be powerful and if confused with hate to be dangerous.  I vow to harness it to become ever more useful in fulfilling the promise of our democracy and the requirements of our planetary interconnectedness.

My mother is a Jungian analyst.  I have been raised to believe that dreams come to us to aid us toward our health and growth.  They are poems, riddles that may suggest uncanny solutions to problems, not that there are easy solutions to any of the large challenges we face as a planet or a nation.  In my dream last night, a vanilla cookie kept the monster at bay.  I did not perish.  I lived to see another day.  In a sense, the vanilla cookie is the solution the dream offers the dreamer.  

I've tried lots of different interpretations on in this paragraph today.  None of them feel quite right. But what I cannot help but point out, and want others to understand, is that the white cookie keeps me safe.  My privilege keeps me safe.  Many bodies are much more at risk than they were before Tuesday night.  Those who walk safely among us have an obligation to use our privilege in whatever form we experience it to protect the more vulnerable and to protect the principles of democracy.  

Whatever it means, I plan bring my very most sincere effort to the work and I hope you will join me.

Take good care.  With love and commitment.