I'm a ship
safe
in harbor, but
I'm meant to
set sail.
I straightened
my mast and
await the high winds.
No one will push me off
the dock.
I'm stuck in the seaweed,
the marsh all around.
Alone
it does nothing,
but jumbled together
I'm tied down.
I don't want to be
safe.
Let it rain.
Flood the shores again.
Untangle me from
this mess so that
I might sail again.
I might
rough the waters and
embrace the high
winds.
I might
look beyond the bow,
past the horizon,
to a sea of milk
and honey.
Sunday, May 10, 2015
Saturday, May 2, 2015
Equality and Learning Metanarrative
Throughout my life, there have been many instances when people assume that I have it all together or that I have things sorted, so to speak. "You've already figured it out." "You know what I'm talking about, right?" "You already know the story/rules/expectations, so I don't need to worry about you."
In a strange sort of irony it is sometimes because of others' assumed understandings of who I am that I sometimes have to work twice as hard just to gain a real sense of understanding. Sure, I may have an idea about what a relationship with Jesus can look like/how to keep professional boundaries/what the rules of the game are, but it doesn't mean that I deserve any less attention than anyone else. Others may need more explaining to even begin to get to a point of understanding on a particular matter, however just leaving me to fend for myself and assuming that I'll be fine isn't a great feeling either.
I know we can't be everything to everyone, but if you're trying to work with people on a level of equality, make an effort to do so. Working equally doesn't mean getting everyone to a certain point and then letting them fend for themselves. That is just about indoctrinating people until they arrive at your presupposed level of accepted understanding, knowledge, spirituality, professionalism, etc. That's not equality. True equality is working with people with different levels of experience, knowledge, spiritual maturity, professionalism, etc. on their terms and where they are. Working with those people to achieve mutual goals. There are certainly sacrifices, but these sacrifices cannot come from just one side.
Mutual sacrifice promotes growth all around. When one side is giving up something valuable and the other is not willing to do the same, the result is a clear unbalance of power. Those yielding power, strength, wisdom, experience, or any act of will to another become submissive to the other. If the other party is not willing to do the same, the yielding party becomes extremely vulnerable to exploitation.
Some may say that it is the weak who submit to authority, however I disagree with this sentiment. Those who submit to authority do so out of a profound trust in said authority. They are willing to submit to an institution, whether it's a religious institution, a community organization, a high education institute, or any other political (or otherwise) group, because they (for better or worse) have placed their trust in that group. The truly weak person, group, or party is the one that is so convinced that its entity is true, in the right, or flawless that it cannot be challenged. To be convinced beyond all traces of a doubt that one's position on a particular issue is right is to not be willing to accept criticism. An unwillingness to accept criticism is a recipe for hidden bias and "island living."
No (wo)man, group, or party is an island. We are all affected by each other. There are truths or ideas that I believe to be absolute, however my belief in these truths does not make them true. Truth cannot be relative. Truth is truth is truth. Opinions are relative.
I may believe that Jesus lived, died, and lives again so that I might have life but that doesn't make it true. If it is true I am grateful, but there are not enough words to prove to anyone what I may have convinced myself to be true. Likewise, another person may believe that homosexual relationships are wrong. They may point to things such as nature for their argument: "Homosexuals cannot procreate and therefore it is unnatural." Perhaps they'll point to tradition: "Sex is reserved for two married people and marriage is defined as the union between a man and a woman."
When we make an argument for (or against) anything, it is helpful to understand the assumptions behind our understanding. By beginning to understand the assumed absolute truths, we may start to understand that we do not understand things that we may claim to understand. To put it paradoxically simply complex: when we know what we don't know, we begin to understand why we think we know what we may not know.
The point of homosexual relations being unnatural because a homosexual act does not allow a couple to procreate acts under the assumption that a sexual act is intended for procreation alone. My understanding of sex is that it is not just an act made for procreation. To be clear however, it is also not just an act for pure ecstasy or carnal enjoyment. I believe that sex is something that is to be embraced on many different levels between people who are so deeply in love with each other that they wish to be intimate with each other physically, spiritually, biologically, emotionally, and the list goes on. To proclaim that sex is only to be reserved for a man and woman in a committed heterosexual relationship is to paint broadly something that has many different levels. Similarly, to say that sex is just a physical act and nothing more is to remove much of the intimacy of such a vastly underestimated act.
I believe that the argument of pointing to tradition is also flawed. To say the common belief of sex throughout recorded history is a unilateral one of heterosexual relations between a married man and a married woman exclusively with each other may sound pleasant at first. However, I can think of another common belief that sounded nice to everyone, and society as a whole took it for truth without wondering about the alternatives: the earth is the center of the universe. Can you imagine the bold narcissism associated with such a belief? "Yeah, us human beings are exceptional. The whole universe literally revolves around us and all of our great achievements." Hearing something like this is quite absurd today because people like Nicolaus Copernicus had the audacity to ask questions rather than just accept repeated tradition as absolute truth.
I want to make one final point before those reading this assume that I am making the argument that accepting absolute truths is foolish; it is not. What I am arguing is that we seek to understand the reasoning behind our understanding. Notice that I did not say that we seek to ensure that others understand the reason behind our understanding. At the end of the day, we all arrive at our own beliefs, opinions, and ideas through our own life experiences. To accept some absolute truths requires faith (certainty in and through uncertainty), while accepting others absolute may require sensory observation or the scientific method.
It all comes down to knowing what you don't know so that 1) others can't place the wool over your eyes without your permission; and 2) your biases and/or assumptions don't influence you without your knowledge.
In a strange sort of irony it is sometimes because of others' assumed understandings of who I am that I sometimes have to work twice as hard just to gain a real sense of understanding. Sure, I may have an idea about what a relationship with Jesus can look like/how to keep professional boundaries/what the rules of the game are, but it doesn't mean that I deserve any less attention than anyone else. Others may need more explaining to even begin to get to a point of understanding on a particular matter, however just leaving me to fend for myself and assuming that I'll be fine isn't a great feeling either.
I know we can't be everything to everyone, but if you're trying to work with people on a level of equality, make an effort to do so. Working equally doesn't mean getting everyone to a certain point and then letting them fend for themselves. That is just about indoctrinating people until they arrive at your presupposed level of accepted understanding, knowledge, spirituality, professionalism, etc. That's not equality. True equality is working with people with different levels of experience, knowledge, spiritual maturity, professionalism, etc. on their terms and where they are. Working with those people to achieve mutual goals. There are certainly sacrifices, but these sacrifices cannot come from just one side.
Mutual sacrifice promotes growth all around. When one side is giving up something valuable and the other is not willing to do the same, the result is a clear unbalance of power. Those yielding power, strength, wisdom, experience, or any act of will to another become submissive to the other. If the other party is not willing to do the same, the yielding party becomes extremely vulnerable to exploitation.
Some may say that it is the weak who submit to authority, however I disagree with this sentiment. Those who submit to authority do so out of a profound trust in said authority. They are willing to submit to an institution, whether it's a religious institution, a community organization, a high education institute, or any other political (or otherwise) group, because they (for better or worse) have placed their trust in that group. The truly weak person, group, or party is the one that is so convinced that its entity is true, in the right, or flawless that it cannot be challenged. To be convinced beyond all traces of a doubt that one's position on a particular issue is right is to not be willing to accept criticism. An unwillingness to accept criticism is a recipe for hidden bias and "island living."
No (wo)man, group, or party is an island. We are all affected by each other. There are truths or ideas that I believe to be absolute, however my belief in these truths does not make them true. Truth cannot be relative. Truth is truth is truth. Opinions are relative.
I may believe that Jesus lived, died, and lives again so that I might have life but that doesn't make it true. If it is true I am grateful, but there are not enough words to prove to anyone what I may have convinced myself to be true. Likewise, another person may believe that homosexual relationships are wrong. They may point to things such as nature for their argument: "Homosexuals cannot procreate and therefore it is unnatural." Perhaps they'll point to tradition: "Sex is reserved for two married people and marriage is defined as the union between a man and a woman."
When we make an argument for (or against) anything, it is helpful to understand the assumptions behind our understanding. By beginning to understand the assumed absolute truths, we may start to understand that we do not understand things that we may claim to understand. To put it paradoxically simply complex: when we know what we don't know, we begin to understand why we think we know what we may not know.
The point of homosexual relations being unnatural because a homosexual act does not allow a couple to procreate acts under the assumption that a sexual act is intended for procreation alone. My understanding of sex is that it is not just an act made for procreation. To be clear however, it is also not just an act for pure ecstasy or carnal enjoyment. I believe that sex is something that is to be embraced on many different levels between people who are so deeply in love with each other that they wish to be intimate with each other physically, spiritually, biologically, emotionally, and the list goes on. To proclaim that sex is only to be reserved for a man and woman in a committed heterosexual relationship is to paint broadly something that has many different levels. Similarly, to say that sex is just a physical act and nothing more is to remove much of the intimacy of such a vastly underestimated act.
I believe that the argument of pointing to tradition is also flawed. To say the common belief of sex throughout recorded history is a unilateral one of heterosexual relations between a married man and a married woman exclusively with each other may sound pleasant at first. However, I can think of another common belief that sounded nice to everyone, and society as a whole took it for truth without wondering about the alternatives: the earth is the center of the universe. Can you imagine the bold narcissism associated with such a belief? "Yeah, us human beings are exceptional. The whole universe literally revolves around us and all of our great achievements." Hearing something like this is quite absurd today because people like Nicolaus Copernicus had the audacity to ask questions rather than just accept repeated tradition as absolute truth.
I want to make one final point before those reading this assume that I am making the argument that accepting absolute truths is foolish; it is not. What I am arguing is that we seek to understand the reasoning behind our understanding. Notice that I did not say that we seek to ensure that others understand the reason behind our understanding. At the end of the day, we all arrive at our own beliefs, opinions, and ideas through our own life experiences. To accept some absolute truths requires faith (certainty in and through uncertainty), while accepting others absolute may require sensory observation or the scientific method.
It all comes down to knowing what you don't know so that 1) others can't place the wool over your eyes without your permission; and 2) your biases and/or assumptions don't influence you without your knowledge.
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
Less than embers
Though not everything is falling apart it sure feels like the world is crumbling. Why does one of my only modes of social contact have to be full of such frustration and disgust? Can I not watch the news? Can I not have a friend who doesn't passive aggressively try to assert his opinion into my soul?
Help.
I'm up.
I'm down.
Down. Down. Down.
Then up. However brief.
Something tries to convince me to embrace the up more than the down, but it's okay to be down sometimes. Really.
I think the world is falling apart. Some days I have hope and some days I'm gasping for air. How are we going to make it here?
Sorry for the overshadowing clouds.
And sorry for apologizing.
I can't seem to get anything right, can I?
Help.
I'm up.
I'm down.
Down. Down. Down.
Then up. However brief.
Something tries to convince me to embrace the up more than the down, but it's okay to be down sometimes. Really.
I think the world is falling apart. Some days I have hope and some days I'm gasping for air. How are we going to make it here?
Sorry for the overshadowing clouds.
And sorry for apologizing.
I can't seem to get anything right, can I?
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
March 2015
(Brought to you in part by mental (sk)illness)
Imagine with me
for a moment: You're in
a dry Sahara, not much around
but you
begin to notice
a massive hole in the
parched earth. The unfortunate
truth is that you must pass
this hole to
continue your journey. You
look for ways around it, you
try and remember what
you've been taught, but
there's no way
around it. You see the edge
and beeline for it. As you try to
rush by on its side
the foundation begins to crumble.
You suddenly see
a familiar face and
she reaches out
her arm.
You're safe, but you can't
seem to find
the solid ground on which she stood
and she's gone.
You trip on your own
feet and
begin to fall again.
Another familiar face appears,
"I'm here
to help!" she shouts down at you.
"Take these and
put them under you. They'll ease
your landing."
"But I don't want to
live here,
this is not my home," you
retort. "I just want to be
back on solid ground and
you're keeping me down."
"Here's a rope and
some string, when you're ready,
build a ladder. You're keeping
yourself down."
As you tumble
further down the pit
you see posts
lining another end of the expanse.
You reach for one and it's
not very sturdy, so you grab another
and another and another,
gradually rising out
from the vast hole. You whisper for help.
Every so often a post crashes
to the bottom or you
lose your grip.
Your cries for help become
clearer, more audible to
the faces above. Some faces jump
in after you. "I'm here," they say.
You use their arms
for support (somehow they stand
on solid ground), trying
to avoid stepping on their faces. You repeatedly express
your
endless gratifications as you reach the top
together. "Just one final push
and I'll make it," you tell
yourself in a daze.
Then your mind rushes
to remember:
I'm not out of
this forever.
As you crawl
around
the hole's outer edge
you see broken glass bottles and
smell olive oil,
so you cautiously rise
to your feet. In the distance
you see shadows, but the dark clouds
haven't reached the horizon.
The hole next
to you hasn't vanished.
A flag that has been
quilted with
a mosaic of voices, tools, and faces
all culminating in
a self-portrait of you
has been placed along its edges.
You pick up
a rope you've fashioned yourself,
thank the hair that
holds it together, and
continue on your way.
Imagine with me
for a moment: You're in
a dry Sahara, not much around
but you
begin to notice
a massive hole in the
parched earth. The unfortunate
truth is that you must pass
this hole to
continue your journey. You
look for ways around it, you
try and remember what
you've been taught, but
there's no way
around it. You see the edge
and beeline for it. As you try to
rush by on its side
the foundation begins to crumble.
You suddenly see
a familiar face and
she reaches out
her arm.
You're safe, but you can't
seem to find
the solid ground on which she stood
and she's gone.
You trip on your own
feet and
begin to fall again.
Another familiar face appears,
"I'm here
to help!" she shouts down at you.
"Take these and
put them under you. They'll ease
your landing."
"But I don't want to
live here,
this is not my home," you
retort. "I just want to be
back on solid ground and
you're keeping me down."
"Here's a rope and
some string, when you're ready,
build a ladder. You're keeping
yourself down."
As you tumble
further down the pit
you see posts
lining another end of the expanse.
You reach for one and it's
not very sturdy, so you grab another
and another and another,
gradually rising out
from the vast hole. You whisper for help.
Every so often a post crashes
to the bottom or you
lose your grip.
Your cries for help become
clearer, more audible to
the faces above. Some faces jump
in after you. "I'm here," they say.
You use their arms
for support (somehow they stand
on solid ground), trying
to avoid stepping on their faces. You repeatedly express
your
endless gratifications as you reach the top
together. "Just one final push
and I'll make it," you tell
yourself in a daze.
Then your mind rushes
to remember:
I'm not out of
this forever.
As you crawl
around
the hole's outer edge
you see broken glass bottles and
smell olive oil,
so you cautiously rise
to your feet. In the distance
you see shadows, but the dark clouds
haven't reached the horizon.
The hole next
to you hasn't vanished.
A flag that has been
quilted with
a mosaic of voices, tools, and faces
all culminating in
a self-portrait of you
has been placed along its edges.
You pick up
a rope you've fashioned yourself,
thank the hair that
holds it together, and
continue on your way.
Saturday, March 28, 2015
Monday, March 9, 2015
Becoming a Professional through Child-like Discord
Where is the line between advice-giving and creating awareness? I know that a large portion of my duties as a professional is advocacy though conversely it is frowned upon to be the one giving advice. So how do I make people aware of the options that are available to them without coming across as recommending one over the other? I think that is where parity of services and a thorough knowledge of the diverse range of resources becomes key.
I want so desperately to be of service to those around me. However, I so often am stopped short by the others' voices inside me telling me not to give advice. Still other voices come at me, telling me not to appear overbearing. "Don't be a part of the problem, but a part of the solution." "You can inform them of our policies, but don't try to convince them one way the other."
It is not my intention to convince people that one way is correctly. On the contrary, I desire to show others the many options that are available to them. When you tell me that I am overly siding with one group or allowing my values to have to convolute my judgment I get lost and don't know where to go anymore. My values say "strive toward egalitarianism and equity." Apparently, I must come across to some as attempting to sway people one way or another. I'm sorry for being myself.
So then you blame me for making this about me. How can I not? How is this not victimizing the victim? I know, my own struggles pale in comparison with those in the world starving for justice and hungry for compassion. However, when you tell me that I'm making it too much about me I wonder how can I change? If you're striving to convince me that I'm blowing things out of proportion, then aren't you the one who is giving advice or labeling unnecessarily?
So I ask you what I can do in an effort to not see things so much from a victim's perspective. You say, "You have to come up with that yourself." So the message I get is that you have every right to point out my problems and shortcomings, but when it comes to suggesting methods for changing those thoughts, behaviors, etc. you are unwilling to work with me. How is that just? "I want to empower you but when I begin to give you suggestions (advice), it is coming from me and not you." So where does that leave me? When I'm stuck and part of you is willing to work with me and the other part says it has to come from within you, what do I do next?
Your efforts to "empower" me live me disempowered. They leave me wondering, "What am I really getting out of this relationship?" I understand your reasoning around not wanting to become an enabler to me and thus create a sense of codependency, but really? How do you expect me to learn this way? I feel this mentorship is very one-sided and it has begun to leave me worse off. Sure, I've learned a lot about myself through this time, and it hasn't all been of my own accord, but I have begun to question your motivations for mentoring me through this. Do you truly have my best interests in mind? Are you really thinking about how I might best succeed? Or are you just hoping to make it through our mandated meetings so that you can add to your own experience, your own CV?
It doesn't seem fair to me though I'm trying to work through it. I'm not one for confrontation, though I know few people who are. Therefore, though you might see my frustrations come out, you may not know their true extent because it seems that the more interactions that we share, the more you lose my trust.
So I'm sorry for coming across as a brash, little child but I'm learning to live this life and lately it just seems like some of the people that claim to be for me are working against me.
I want so desperately to be of service to those around me. However, I so often am stopped short by the others' voices inside me telling me not to give advice. Still other voices come at me, telling me not to appear overbearing. "Don't be a part of the problem, but a part of the solution." "You can inform them of our policies, but don't try to convince them one way the other."
It is not my intention to convince people that one way is correctly. On the contrary, I desire to show others the many options that are available to them. When you tell me that I am overly siding with one group or allowing my values to have to convolute my judgment I get lost and don't know where to go anymore. My values say "strive toward egalitarianism and equity." Apparently, I must come across to some as attempting to sway people one way or another. I'm sorry for being myself.
So then you blame me for making this about me. How can I not? How is this not victimizing the victim? I know, my own struggles pale in comparison with those in the world starving for justice and hungry for compassion. However, when you tell me that I'm making it too much about me I wonder how can I change? If you're striving to convince me that I'm blowing things out of proportion, then aren't you the one who is giving advice or labeling unnecessarily?
So I ask you what I can do in an effort to not see things so much from a victim's perspective. You say, "You have to come up with that yourself." So the message I get is that you have every right to point out my problems and shortcomings, but when it comes to suggesting methods for changing those thoughts, behaviors, etc. you are unwilling to work with me. How is that just? "I want to empower you but when I begin to give you suggestions (advice), it is coming from me and not you." So where does that leave me? When I'm stuck and part of you is willing to work with me and the other part says it has to come from within you, what do I do next?
Your efforts to "empower" me live me disempowered. They leave me wondering, "What am I really getting out of this relationship?" I understand your reasoning around not wanting to become an enabler to me and thus create a sense of codependency, but really? How do you expect me to learn this way? I feel this mentorship is very one-sided and it has begun to leave me worse off. Sure, I've learned a lot about myself through this time, and it hasn't all been of my own accord, but I have begun to question your motivations for mentoring me through this. Do you truly have my best interests in mind? Are you really thinking about how I might best succeed? Or are you just hoping to make it through our mandated meetings so that you can add to your own experience, your own CV?
It doesn't seem fair to me though I'm trying to work through it. I'm not one for confrontation, though I know few people who are. Therefore, though you might see my frustrations come out, you may not know their true extent because it seems that the more interactions that we share, the more you lose my trust.
So I'm sorry for coming across as a brash, little child but I'm learning to live this life and lately it just seems like some of the people that claim to be for me are working against me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)