Menu
Empower Yourself
I just read an article titled The Lies Those Of Us Over 50 Were Told When We Were Young on the Huffington post. Well, I'm over 50 and love the book Lies My Teacher Told Me for opening my eyes to how much historical misinformation we are taught in our schools, so I eagerly clicked on the link to the Huffington Post article. Here is an excerpt:
I come from a generation that was given certain promises. My generation was told we needed to do well on the SAT. We were told we needed to have leadership positions in clubs and other extracurricular activities, do volunteer work, and write stellar essays for our college applications. We were told we needed to get a four-year degree, and learn how to 'think'. We were promised that as long as we did all of these things we would become successful in life. The article goes on to lament the fact that the world changed around us, and that despite doing all the things listed above, many people over 50 are suffering in the current economy and younger people with different skills are taking our jobs. As those who are 50 years old and older, we are seen as too old to hire, but too young to retire, and are quietly ignored during job searches...The older female worker now finds younger, unaware women willing to trod on her for jobs that previously would have been unavailable if not for her own previous trailblazing Of course the author is right; the economy is difficult for everyone, and it is much harder for those over 50 to find their place in the new economy. In a kind of pathetic cheerleading attempt to make us feel better, she reminds us that those of us over 50 are survivors by regurgitating every FaceBook meme about our childhood that I've seen in the last two or three years. You know, the ones that start with we "didn't use seat belts, bike helmets or hand sanitizer. We frequently licked the lead paint on our cribs because it tasted good, and we always sat too close to our color television sets after school because we were alone in the house until mom got home. We rattled around in the back of our family's station wagons like marbles, on endless road trip vacations." It is rather convenient for her argument to ignore the millions of people who didn't survive when they were killed or severely injured for not wearing a seat belt or helmet, those who suffer mental illness or health difficulties because their houses were lined with lead paint, and those were thrown from the back of the vehicle, but hey, I guess they just weren't survivors. Donald Trump would call them losers. But what really irks me about this article is that the author Chanler Jeffers gives the impression that those of us over 50 are just innocent victims of the times that changed around us. The truth is that it is my generation, those of us in our 50s and 60s, who created this world that rejects us like old clothes in favour of younger, cheaper models of ourselves. When Ronald Reagan took the first step towards breaking up unions, my generation said nothing. Hell, we put him in office. When the meme Greed is Good made an entrance, my generation embraced it with all we had, and we consumed, and ran up credit, and threw out the old to get more and more new 'stuff'; when Reagan's policies created more and more homeless, we just walked on by, looked away, and went shopping in that new mall they built where there used to be a park that we played in as children; when Clinton signed the North American Free Trade Agreement, we just laughed at that crazy old man named Ross Perot who warned us of the giant sucking sound that would occur when our jobs and businesses move south of the border; we were too busy buying more cars and plastic shit to worry about global warming, now changed to climate change because my generation was too comfortable with the status quo that we believed it, or at least conveniently pretended to, when authorities told us climate change is all just a bunch of hooey; and my generation is the loudest in crying foul when we have to pay taxes to help our government function, the ones who say, "I'm not getting 'X,' so why should I have to pay taxes for it!" So, yeah, those of us in our 50s are having a tough time of it. But so is everyone except a few. It is of our own making, so the answer is not to supply readers with a list of self-help links with tips for getting a job over 50 as Jeffers does in her article. The solution is to take a good hard look at how we made our bed and what we can do to make a new society that fits our needs and leaves a decent opportunity for those who come after us. My list would include the following: Volunteer Allocate one day a week a non-shopping day. Get involved with local government--heck, run for local government. Attend meetings with your local politicians and make your opinions heard. Buy from small businesses rather than chain stores or corporations. Buy from local farms. Start your own business. Support a union--join a union--it is not a coincidence that since unions have been under attack, wages have stagnated, hours are longer and the worker is under attack on all fronts. Reject trickle-down economics. George Bush called it voodoo economics and he was right. Demand policies that help the middle class and let the income trickle up for a change. And my number one suggestion--don't be afraid. Not only do our fears hold us back, they are used by savvy politicians to divide us and maintain the status quo. This is just a start. I'm sure there are many more things that people would suggest to make changes in our world. Any other ideas?
2 Comments
In all the news about Kesha, I keep reading reference to how much money the studio has already paid out in support of her career. In Why Sony Doesn't Want to Let Kesha Out of Her Contract With Her Alleged Abuser we learn
Gottwald invested $60 million in Sebert’s career. That is a lot of money, but just a few paragraphs later, we are told Say Sebert goes into the studio and records an album that costs half a million dollars to produce. “The label fronts all that money for the recording costs, and it’s recuperable against the artist — the artist won’t start seeing royalties until the costs are recouped — and if the artist never makes a dime, the record label is in the hole for half a million. So, it costs a half million dollars to produce the music, and the artist doesn't get paid until those costs are recouped. Well, I hope a salary for the artist is included in that half a million, but it is good business to pay your costs before handing out the profits, so Sony certainly can't be faulted for that. However, in the grand scheme of pop music, her status is still that of a platinum-selling artist who makes her label a lot of money. and the major labels invest so much money in breaking a new artist that they’re reluctant to break a contract with an artist because they want to make their investment back and then some. Sure they would. Again, that is just good business, but it also seems like the real issue here is that Kesha is an artist who makes the label money, and they want to keep her working because their other investments haven't paid off. According to Rolling Stone Magazine, "despite Luke's efforts, [Kemosabe] has failed to be an Iovine-esque success. Billboard sources claim it's burned through about $20 million and "has [Miley] Cyrus [via "Wrecking Ball," etc.] to thank for being in the black." Cyrus has not worked with Dr. Luke in some time (but she did express support for Kesha via Instagram by sharing a photo of Fiona Apple with a pro-Kesha sign). Otherwise, Kemosabe's biggest artist by far is Kesha." And therein, lies the problem for me. Sony has every right to try to make back their money and profit off of Kesha's success. But Kesha shouldn't have to be responsible for Sony's other bad investments. Especially not at the expense of her health and well-being. No one will likely know for sure whether her sexual allegations are true, although I suspect they are. Very few women invite the negative consequences that come with such allegations into their lives. But the issue is not whether she was raped by her producer. The issue is whether she should be forced to work for a man who she feels has taken advantage of her emotionally and sexually. Should she be obligated to make money for him? Of course she shouldn't. And it is situations like this that make it easier to understand why so many artists (George Michael, The Clash, Nine Inch Nails) are against the corporations they initially work with. I have to admit, as a white, middle aged, middle class woman, I have no idea what Beyonce's video and song "Formation" are about. I don't particularly find the song interesting, and all I got out of the video was that it was beautifully done and gorgeous to look at.
But it sure lit a fire under a lot of people. I have seen virulent critiques of the song, the singer, and even the NFL for allowing Beyonce to perform it at the Super Bowl. And most of those critiques have come from other white people I know. According to them, it is anti-white and anti-cop. So why would I be writing about it on a blog about empowerment? Because, for the most part, history is written by the powerful, and African Americans have not been served well by our current historical narrative. Accomplishments by African Americans are rarely lauded. Did you know that the modern gaming console was invented by African American Gerald Lawson? Did you know that African Americans invented the carbon filament for light bulbs that made them long-lasting and efficient, the X-Ray spectrometer, blood banks, the traffic light, and movable refrigeration, to name a few of the many, many inventions that African Americans have made that improve our lives? I remember a day 18 years ago when I saw a poster in a colleague's office about Garrett Morgan, the traffic light inventor. I remember that day because I was astonished--not about the fact that I had learned in high school about the inventor of the light bulb, the cotton gin, the steam engine, and gun powder, but not a word about the traffic light--I was astonished that I felt shocked that an African American was the inventor. Yeah, I'm not proud of that, but it says a lot about the environment I was raised in and the kinds of things that my education consisted of. I had learned that African Americans were slaves, oppressed, poor, powerless, uneducated, and voiceless. It never occurred to me to wonder where those educated, well-dressed, and powerful-speaking civil rights leaders came from. And no one in my circle of educators, family or community (granted, I was a child in the 60s and a teen in the 70s) offered to inform me of anything different. Well, apparently, Beyonce's video takes on all of that and more. Jim Downs, a professor of History and American Studies at Connecticut College, writes that Beyonce's video takes "aim at traditional portraits of black people as subjugated, regimented, and unquestionably heterosexual. In place of those traditional bonds, she restores to them their multifaceted history." And that is why this video and song are empowering. Beyond the obvious that those in the African American community can immediately understand its messages, it pricks at the consciousness of white America by making us feel uncomfortable about things we are comfortable with. Her song, because of its pop status and ability to reach millions of Americans, forces all of us to see African Americans as something other than what we have been told they are. And it forces us to respond to the unresolved issues of Hurricane Katrina, police killings of unarmed black men, stop and frisk, and the plethora of issues that face black America that the rest of us are blithely unaware of. The song and video not only embrace the history of African Americans, but celebrate the black experience, and Beyonce's message is that we are here, we are black, we are proud and we will not accept the status quo. That message has always been scary to those who have historically had the power and written the history of America. It doesn't have to be scary. All of us, regardless of our ethnicity, should stop circling our wagons to protect the status quo. Sure, it is natural to reflexively respond by defending the status quo. But come on, even the slightest bit of self-reflection would reveal that there is still a lot of work to be done in race relations, that not all Americans have equal possibilities, and it isn't because they are lazy or unmotivated. "Formation" should be viewed as a call for all Americans to look beyond the superficial, question our own motivations and way of thinking, and think outside our comfort zone. For white Americans, that means not only taking an honest look at the lives and contributions of non-European based Americans, but also how our policies have both empowered and subjugated whole ethnicities of people; for non-European Americans, it means...you know what? I don't know what it means. I'm a white middle-aged, middle class woman, and history was written about and by my ancestors. I have no right to tell the powerless what they need to do. But I sure hope there is someone out there who does have that ability. This empowering essay comes from a millennial woman who is angry about the status quo. And no wonder; millennials face a difficult future thanks to the policies and activities of we baby boomers. I worry so much about the future for my children. I worry if climate change will result in my children facing uncertainties regarding enough food and water in coming decades; I worry if they will have economic opportunities that will enable them to have children without living in poverty and jobs that won't require long hours with little pay; I worry if my daughter will have the opportunity to decide for herself when to have children; and I worry what kind of world we all will live in if treaties like the TPP are ratified. And millennials are worried about these same issues. Those are the stakes in this election. It is kind of that simple.
Excerpt: If anything concerns me at this pivotal moment, it's not the revolutionary tremors of the youth. Given the Great American Trash Fire we have inherited, this rebellion strikes me as exceedingly reasonable. Pick a crisis, America: Child poverty? Inexcusable. Medical debt? Immoral. For-profit prison? Medieval. Climate change? Apocalyptic. The Middle East is our Vietnam. Flint, the canary in our coal mine. Tamir Rice, our martyred saint. This place is a mess. We're due for a hard rain. If I am alarmed, it is by the profound languor of the comfortable. What fresh hell must we find ourselves in before those who've appointed themselves to lead our thoughts admit that we are in flames? As I see it, to counsel realism when the reality is fucked is to counsel an adherence to fuckery. Under conditions as distressing as these, acquiescence is absurd. When your nation gets classified as a Class D structure fire, I believe the only wise course is to lose your shit. See the full article here. I am on the fence about voting for Hillary Clinton, but her supporters are pushing me towards Sanders.
Gloria Steinem--yeah, one of the most famous feminists--just said on the Bill Maher show, "When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’” Steinem said. Steinem walked back her comments after the understandable backlash, then she apologised, and made a statement about how young women are passionate and involved, etc., etc., but her true thoughts were already exposed. You would think someone as smart and accomplished as Madeleine Albright would have learned from Steinem's stupid mistake, but yesterday, Albright says, “We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it’s done. It’s not done. There is a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!” Well, I hope she gets as much backlash as Steinem, but for me, the problem with both of these comments is that they are so belittling to women! From women! From feminists! Despite her apology, Steinem must believe, to some degree, that young women who support Sanders are not involved in the political process and don't have valid reasons for their support. If that is not one of the most denigrating, arrogant comments, then I don't know what is. And Steinem should know better. But Albright's comment incenses me. She dares to suggest that supporting a candidate whose belief system matches a woman's own belief system is less important than supporting a candidate whose genital structure is the same as the voter's. Really? How about Phyllis Schlafly? What if she decides to run for office? Phyllis Schlafly who successfully campaigned against passage of the Equal Rights for Women amendment, which is still not in effect because it needs three more states to ratify it. Or what about Jean Schmidt, the Republican from Ohio who has no compunction about lying to push her agenda that would take away the right for women to access abortions? According to Albright, we are obligated to support those women, too, simply because they are women. Of course, Albright would counter that we have to support women who would advance the rights of women; in other words women who have the same belief system as ours. Oh, right, but that argumentation doesn't apply if Sanders is the one whose beliefs match your own. I'm so confused. I need Albright to help me out. Or maybe I really need a man to tell me what to do. No. I am a woman. I have my own way of making decisions. And my message to Steinem and Albright is tell me why you think Clinton is the better candidate. Tell me something that I don't know about Clinton. But don't insult my intelligence by trying to shame women into supporting Clinton. It might just backfire, because your tactics are pushing me towards Sanders. I spend a lot of time on the Internet, and come across a variety of terms used when people write about feminism. Apparently, there are bad feminists and radical feminists, feminists who should be more feminine, and manifestos that women can/should refer to. Some articles are written tongue-in-cheek, thank god, because we sure could use a respite from the bang-you-over-the-head tactics that so many articles use.
My favourite article about feminism is by columnist Roxane Gay, who writes, "If I am, indeed, a feminist, I am a rather bad one. I am a mess of contradictions." She then goes on to describe how she loves rap music despite its misogynist lyrics, likes pink, wears dresses, and enjoys the company of men. In short, she is a woman. It is important to remember that we are women first and foremost. We are feminists because we ARE women. There may be some women who are militant, hate men and want a world without men, but the vast majority of us just want to be ourselves and to function as equals in our homes, communities, and at work. I don't mind the label feminist, but it is important that the label mean what I want it to mean: namely that I want to be myself; that I want to compete in a world that values my contributions as well as those of my friends, daughters, and colleagues; that all women, rich and poor, black, brown or white, be able to decide for themselves what to do about pregnancy; and that we be paid equal pay for equal work. It really is not a lot to ask. |
AuthorI am a yoga instructor, author and activist. I wrote The Diamond Tree to inspire women to take chances. Even if the outcome of any given risk is different than expected, there is something for the community and the individual to gain from it. Archives
May 2020
Categories |