Thoughts on the extended family - Journal Entry

Original source Photo by Robert Tadlock. Used with permission.

When the deep melancholy of my soul demands my full attention. Lick this wound, it says, pick this scab. Wallow and whine. You have been hurt, it says. What hurts the most is seeming to be forgotten, not even missed. In retrospect, not forgotten, perhaps more like disregarded. For a long time I missed the family relationships I once had. I poured love into them because I liked them, loved them. I gave my hospitality and my heart. I helped them when they needed it, gave them a place to stay, showed them around tried, tried, tried like heck to build a family. Sometimes when they stepped on my toes I ignored it, because I had a hard time standing up for myself. I also feel everyone should have an occasional pass or two when they behave badly, so long as it's rare not habitual. When they kept stepping on my toes I finally had to say something. Ouch! That hurts could you please not do it again? I guess they like to step wherever they like with no regard to the toes of others, because when I mentioned it, they shut me out shut me down. And no matter what efforts I made to smooth things over and rebuild a relationship, to this day we remain estranged. And even from afar, when I have established a safe distance, they seem to continue to find ways to step on toes. I must conclude that they like stepping on people's toes. Why?
from 7/29/2011

Boyhood Movie - Is Race an Issue In One Scene?

I’m linking an article about a so-called problematic scene in the movie Boyhood. Please read the AV article, here, before you continue with mine. If you’re not familiar with the movie you can google it, but I recommend seeing it. See the trailer here, including rating information. It’s an enjoyable, but rather low-key drama, quite novel in that it was filmed very gradually, with the same actors over a period of 12 years. It has a very natural and organic quality to it as it focuses primarily on the main character, a boy, and his mom, sister and dad - in that order.

The author of the AV article raises a point that is worth exploring, however, I want to consider it from another angle. What if that scene was taken from a colorblind point of view? What if that of-the-cuff teacherly advice given to a young laborer who was repairing something at the teacher’s home were given by a teacher of any race to a “student/laborer” of any race? It’s typical advice about going to school and bettering oneself. The AV article characterizes the scene as having a

...cringeworthy white-savior aspect.

I have to disagree that it's ingrained racism or colonialism - it's simply a preachy teacher not unlike thousands of other real-life teachers and coaches who evangelize their education/betterment message. While it is not the theme of this movie, it is the main theme of dozens of other movies from To Sir With Love to Stand and Deliver. That particular scene is nothing more and nothing less that a teacher doing her thing and trying to promote education.

The movie is set in Texas, I live in Florida, both places with great population diversity, it is not unusual for a young person of any race or socioeconomic background, for that matter, to work such a job. Even many "rich white kids" work such jobs during the summer. Maybe it's a family business. I believe it’s more about blue-collar work versus white collar work. I think it is unnecessary to make any notation of race in this scene and in this movie. The entire movie is meant to be an intimate look into a few particular people’s lives.

The other dimension of the AV article’s criticism centered on the scene set many years later, when we see the interactions between the advice-giving teacher, the advice taking [former]laborer, and the children of the teacher. The later scene does play awkward - as the AV article notes. The student/laborer’s testimony is not much of a big deal to the teacher/mom’s young adult children - they do not register much about it at all! I find that to be a truly a natural reaction. The Bible says “A prophet is not without honor, except in his own home,” and I’d wager the same for a teacher, or anyone really, in the eyes of their own teenaged or young adult children. Sure, it served as a set up for the mom's final scene, it rang very true for me. The AV article noted the teacher/mom appeared to be only be a bit more affected than her children by the young man’s testimony of her positive influence. While awkward, it does also strike me as natural - that an accidental meeting and declaration of such kind, particularly out-of-context and during a family dinner in public, would play that way. If the young man sought her out on campus in her office or classroom, or even in her home, it could have engendered a different reaction. The AV article seems to be saying that these things are insensitive and a form of racism. That the mom/teacher's influence of the young laborer was not dully noted by her and her children, nor was he more than a blip on their radar seems rather typical of a stranger that one sees only twice in a dozen years.

There are probably people who have been kind to you or I over the years, who did something special for us, that would register similarly. The stranger who gave you a ride when you were broke down on the side of the road, the manager you worked for as a teen that gave you a nugget of wise advice that stayed with you all your life and served a good purpose. (Heck, I even wrote about a similar offhand remark having a profound impact on me, here.) It’s not prejudicial that we may no longer remember their names - it’s life. Typical stuff that happens to every one of us, and that is what this movie was about - all the natural, mundane aspects of our lives as we move and grow in various ways, and the cumulative effect they have.

50 Shades of Gray and A Quest for Fire

So much hoopla and buzz is swirling again now that the movie adaptation of 50 Shades of Gray is coming out. Full disclosure, I have not read the book and I am a so-called conservative “born-again” Jesus Christ-follower. I am also a feminist in the classic sense. So I would suppose that would already be two strikes against this book and movie for me. However, I will try to look at this from angles other than my own deeply felt faith, convictions and beliefs. This is basically my own editorializing, and this editorializing is from the point of view that is aside from any religious objection alone, as I'm sure there will be many such theological and religious people writing more eloquently than I on this movie/book and Christian faith and ethics. I'm just speaking to the general culture, a mix of religious and irreligious. Please be warned this may get grown-up and graphic and that can make sensitive and conservative folks uncomfortable. Since I myself am often one of those sensitive, conservative and oft-uncomfortable folk, I appreciate a warning. So, my fellows, this is that warning.

I’m not a prude, I have a past, rather adventurous, and perhaps because I’ve ventured some I can say this: What ever happened to good, old fashioned sex? You know, two people with chemistry, eye-to-eye, kiss-to-kiss, c*ck-to-p*ssy, come together or take turns, both are satisfied, a bit of spooning then sleep. Why do we need to push, poke and prod ourselves into outlandish and foreign territory? Isn’t an orgasm an orgasm? Are we debasing ourselves and each other by choking, spanking, spiking and binding ourselves in the search for more intensity? Can we ask ourselves is this healthy for our bodies? Is this healthy for our souls? Is this healthy for our emotions?

My second notion in regards to all of this would be - is “Gray” just another take on Beauty and The Beast; and therefore, just another in the long line of possibly warped fairy tails, tales indicative of a patriarchal and more uncivilized age? I like Beauty and The Beast, in particular I love the Jean Cocteau version, and am also fond of the Disney movie. However, there is a negative interpretation of these stories: a beastly, mean, rude, selfish man is transformed by the love of a patient, put-upon, good-natured, resourceful, beautiful woman. Her love, which was largely demonstrated by her tolerating her own discomfort and his prick-ish behaviour (in two senses of the word) is the agent of transformation. In one sense that is the essence of Christian love, i.e., The Loving and Innocent Jesus Christ sacrificing Himself to redeem all of man-and-womankind. And yes, all healthy human relationships succeed with a mutual and loving patience and tolerance. But in the context of “Gray” and “The Beast” is it really a healthy attitude for women to harbor that by their sweet love and suppression of their own best interests they can transform a egocentric jerk into a benevolent prince? Is it even healthy to still harbor these fantasies? I don’t know. “The heart wants what the heart wants.” I know quite a few women who persevered patiently like Belle but were never able to break the spell on their Beasts. And it wasn’t for lack of trying or waiting. So does all of this continue to feed into the old and outdated and unrealistic notion that women have to “fix” their men, and men are allowed somewhat of a pass on their untamed side? Why not just find a partner that’s not broken in the first place. (I know all of us are broken, but speaking in more excessive terms here.)

Is all of this sex game play really driving us farther away from each other, rather that closer? We are having a variety of "better sex" but do we have better love? There is a film that came out in the early 80s called Quest For Fire, and it is basically about the plight of primitive man in his search for making, finding and keeping fire, but it also touches on the greater themes of civilization such as art, cooperation, humor/laughter, and love/affection. In one very telling scene the “caveman” is taught a more personal, and thus fulfilling, way of mating with his “cavewoman” partner when she switches position from the animalistic “doggie-style” to the face-to-face, front-to-front position (missionary). They look into each other’s eyes, they smile. That my friends, it what life, love and sex is all about. It’s as if they’re saying, “Mmmm, hey you! This feels good!“ It’s more than the just act itself, it’s the intimate human connection. Please don’t take this as an endorsement for boring sex. The common wisdom of our age says that we need to spice it up when things get stagnant; and we do know that with the natural rhythms of life there are times when we need to rekindle the flames of love. Many claim that what is portrayed in "Gray" and its ilk are one effective way of spicing things up. A couples’ sex life should be fun, playful and satisfying. But above-all it should serve to strengthen their deep bond not weaken it. Do seek to revive something that has grown weak, but let your passion grow with a genuine, insightful and intuitive connection, not something dark and ultimately harmful. So I think my point is that sometimes the basic human connection gets lost in all the blindfolds and silk ties, and we can’t let that real spark die.

above photo by http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mattes

Songs that Stumped Shazam

Having only had the Shazam app for a few weeks now, I occasionally test it with a song I already know and am listening to. So far, Shazam has not been able to identify the following two songs, so check them out:

and



Feel free to comment and share any songs with which you have also stumped Shazam.

Funny Friday

What if I told you...?

What if I told you that someone very dear to me had congestive heart failure, and experienced symptoms of pain and breathlessness. Would you feel compassion for them? What if I told you my loved one had cancer. Would you find a way to show some moral support? What if I told you my family member was mentally ill and his/her symptoms are that of erratic and disturbing behaviour that is often emotionally hurtful to him/herself and others? What then would your reaction be?

In my family, there are those that completely cut themselves out of this person's life. I get that. Damage was done. And I actually don’t have a problem with that. My mentally-sick loved one has hurt every single person that has ever been close to him/her, or helped him/her. And the list of lies and betrayals is various and long. I guarantee that they have almost certainly hurt me and my family in greater ways many more times. Forgive me for getting testy with that last sentence, this isn't a contest of who has been hurt the most. I understand that everyone has to make the best choices they can for themselves. It’s a valid and often necessary choice to disengage from people that hurt and betray.

What has been most unfortunate and painful to me, is that this segment of the family seemed to go a step farther. They cut me and my family from their lives also. Presumably because we had chosen to maintain some relationship with the ill person, albeit a distant and limited one. We never insisted they maintain a relationship with our ill loved one after she/he offended them. We only kept the lines of communication open for ourselves. Without me getting too personal or specific, I will say that some relationships can be stronger than a Denali-sized heap of betrayal. Strong bonds such as a parent-to-child, can’t (or won’t) allow for ever giving up completely. And the offenses I speak of aren’t capital offenses, they are incidents of embarrassment, lies, unpredictable actions, things of that nature. I can't fully understand why they cut us off, I speculate that the inconvenience, messiness and stigma of mental illness is not compatible with their image of family life. It hurts to realize that the very people who distanced themselves from us, were among the same family members that we were supportive of while they went through their own struggles of a different sort.

Photo by smiteme. Permission granted under Flickr Creative Commons Agreement.

Illness is illness. I can't help but wonder that if said loved one had another kind of illness, she/he and we might not have been so summarily written-off, because other medical conditions garner more understanding and empathy. Mental illness is tricky. Just as we protect ourselves when a friend or loved on has a contagious illness, we often need to have some kind of protection with loved ones who have mental illnesses. Just as we adjust our expectations of what a physically ill person is capable of, we must have realistic expectations of what a mentally ill person is capable of. Education is a key factor, as is awareness. Then the necessary precautions must be taken. However, I chose not to abandon completely my mentally ill family member. I chose not to be embarrassed by, or unnecessarily cut off from them, after many painful and awkward starts and stops throughout the years. This didn't happen overnight, this was a process that happened over time, with many trials and errors, and educating myself as much as I could as I went along. Yes, my loved one is at times erratic, insensitive, and offensive. I wonder how much is within and how much is beyond their control due to their illness? I’m not sure. It is not easy, but it is possible to still maintain a loving and supportive relationship. Sometimes a glimmer of their old self shines through and it’s enjoyable. Sometimes it’s just letting them know that someone will be here for them. Sure, we have to be more guarded, and have to protect ourselves in certain ways, but at least our loved one has some knowledge that there are a few of us that still care.

I’m sharing this story in hopes that someone reading it may have a more compassionate approach to those with mental illness or those with loved ones who have mental health issues.

In the teachings of that divine and enlightened One, Jesus of Nazareth, He said, it’s easy to love those that love you. It’s easy to be good to those who are good to you. He exhorted us to be loving and caring toward those who are difficult and challenging(see here). So, I’m trying. I have to say, the shunning from my “healthy” loved ones hurts rather more than any of the things my unwell loved-one does or did.

from a journal entry 2009/10

MLK Day thoughts

"When our most tireless efforts fail to stop the surging sweep of oppression, we need to know that in this universe is a God whose matchless strength is a fit contrast to the sordid weakness of man. But there are also times when we need to know that God possesses love and mercy.

-Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength to Love

image from Library of Congress archives

Don't let his dream die, we have come a long way, but we still have a long way to go.

A Post About The Camel Passing Through the Eye of an Needle, and Riches

Photo by lapideo

Part of my daily bible reading via my LifeJournal plan at YouVersion this past week included Luke 18:18-27.
There is a popular legend that explains this verse as such: One of the gates into Jerusalem in Jesus' day was called The Eye of The Needle. It was used by travelers who came to the city after hours when the main gates had already been shut for the night. The legend explains that this gate was intentionally made small so that marauders couldn’t overtake the city via its access. Yet, the stray traveler could enter this very narrow passageway and find safety within city walls during the night. To get through it, the rider had to dismount their camel, and all saddles and bags had to be removed. The rider had to carry the saddles and baggage, or rather push and pull through the very small opening, possibly even unpacking some of it, and the camel had to scoot through on its knees. So, the semi-popular teaching of this legend goes that a rich person can indeed go through an Eye of the Needle like camels and their riders enter through this Gate - “on their knees” and “without baggage.” It’s a very sensible teaching to stress such points - all of us indeed must humble ourselves before the Great God of the Universe, and get rid of the baggage that weighs us down. So you can see how the popularity of this legend has given it quite a following among many Western Christians.

I decided to do some digging, because I could never find any evidence of this particular gate in concordances, commentaries or study bibles I have. There is a reason for that, and really, it’s quite plainly there in the very passage. So let’s read it again with emphasis:

A ruler questioned Him, saying, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments, ‘Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.’” And he said, “All these things I have kept from my youth.” When Jesus heard this, He said to him, “One thing you still lack; sell all that you possess and distribute it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” But when he had heard these things, he became very sad, for he was extremely rich. And Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” They who heard it said, “Then who can be saved?” But He said, “The things that are impossible with people are possible with God.”

It’s right there in what I italicized and put in bold print: If this gate was a real and common feature of the city, they would have all known it and their response would not have been “Who then can be saved?” The disciples reply might have gone something like this, “Ahh, only those who strip themselves down and humble themselves on their knees can be saved.” (Which is rather the truth, by the way, so long as it is motivated by faith in Jesus and His redemptive work.) No, Jesus was messing with the common wisdom of the day that the rich were somehow automatically blessed and approved by God. One article I read, and if I find it again (I misplaced it!), I will gladly give link and credit, anyway, the writer said something like this: If Jesus had been speaking in modern day America He might have said, "The rich will get to heaven when pigs fly" because that best explains the colloquial use of language Jesus was employing in using this saying. Jesus told them, not only was it not true that wealth=equals=God's approval, but quite the opposite, that it was a practical impossibility that the rich could be accepted by God. Wow. Re-read that again. Then recall the disciples response, “Well, then who CAN be saved?” And I remind you of Jesus’ response “The things that are impossible with people are possible with God.” There is hope.

There is always hope. Jesus perceived in the rich young man from the passage the one thing He wasn’t willing to surrender or give up. God will have no idols above Him in our lives. Some of us are the same way that young man was. If it’s not wealth, it could be a relationship, a habit, pride, comfort, whatever. Some people have hobbies, goals and even "good things" they are passionate about, but those things out-distance their passion for God. Jesus’ words here should be taken soberly and it’s best not to make light of what is being said. If you think about it, what He said about riches hits you like a very strong blow, not so much a knock-out blow to the head, as a powerful whack to the gut that leaves you reeling and catching your breath as you process it.

He’s Our Teacher and He said this for a reason. It is harsh. I think that is one of the problems I have with this Needle Gate Legend. It seems like a good and sound teaching, at first glance. But it still diminishes the severe truth Jesus was stating. Jesus also stated, The Truth will set us free (see here). The whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help us God.

I cite the following sites as being helpful and informative in me writing this post: Christianity beta; The Straight Dope; Old City Gates.

An Old Column by Charley Reese

Having spent my formative years in the Orlando-Metro region of Florida, and having been an avid Orlando Sentinel reader, I recall columnist Charley Reese with fondness. This article is neither pro nor con any particular political party, just expressive of that plain sense that seems to have evaporated from our political system. It's been making the rounds on facebook after a dormant period. It had quite an active streak as an email forward (remember those?) in the 2000s, with various incarnations and modifications that mentioned the politicians and wars of the day. I think it bears repeating, and is just as timely now, perhaps more so, as it was when it was originally published in 1984.

The 545 People Responsible For All Of U.S. Woes
BY Charley Reese
(Originally published in the Orlando Sentinel) exact date of publication unknown, circa 1984)

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes? You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don’t write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don’t set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don’t control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does. One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices – 545 human beings out of the 235 million – are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country. I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank. I excluded all but the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislation’s responsibility to determine how he votes. A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY Don’t you see how the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O’Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes. O’neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetos it, they can pass it over his veto. REPLACE SCOUNDRELS It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts – of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can’t think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist. If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it’s because they want them in Lebanon. There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do. Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses – provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

Have a Groovy Day

10 Songs, Old and New(er)

Some days are like a dreamy purgatory, if I don't have enough solitary time, I know that it will not be good for me later. So please Do Not Disturb unless there is blood, vomit or a bump on the head. My Christmas tree is still up, the Three Kings have come and gone, and it isn't even losing needles and it smells good. Calvin stepped on my toe last night and I thought it was nothing much, but today the one that went weee, wee, wee is black and blue and broken(?).


Thank you "said the gramophone" for helping when I am stuck in a music rut. Leave feedback if you feel like it's the right thing to do. One more thing. Bleed is an incredible song, I never heard it before this week.

A Radical Test

Abraham and Isaac Climb Mt. Moriah by Gustave Dore

After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, "Abraham!" And he said, "Here am I." He said, "Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you."

This is another potentially violent and disturbing passage of scripture, the Old Testament (OT) is full of them. God asks Abraham to sacrifice his beloved son. Requests like that are the stuff of lunacy - if we heard of such a thing today we’d consider schizophrenia or delusions. Why would God do that? What kind of God would do that? I'm sure Abraham had such questions, but he must of kept them to himself and reasoned it out. Maybe Abraham's reasoning went something like this:

God told me to leave my father's country and I did and it has gone well for me. God has been teaching me not to lie, or to do any other sinful activity, and it has gone well for me. God seems different from - and displeased with the activities associated with the other pagan religions I observe around me. They commit human sacrifice, among other things, and this God who has called me, and brought me this far has never before made such a request. God told me that my barren wife would bear me a son, even in our old age, and it happened. God told me that I would have numerous descendants through that son, so...I must therefore trust God.

It must've been so difficult for Abraham to obey this command, but we see that he does and all the while, he says "The Lord will provide the sacrifice." And God does! He does not require Isaac's life and intervenes at nearly the last moment. It seems fairly clear that the Lord never intended for Issac's life to be taken this way. I once heard a very inspiring teaching that the entire time Abraham and Isaac were walking up one side of Mt. Moriah, God had sent the ram up the other side, allowing it to get caught in the thicket, and thereby being the sacrifice in Issac's stead. God had planed it and provided it all along! God asks for radical faith and obedience. He was simply testing Abraham's faith and obedience AND pointing to the fact that one day, God Himself would fulfill the covenant by providing His Own Son Jesus.

This was today's reading within my yearly reading from the LifeJournal plan at YouVersion.

Out of the mouths of babes...

So, just as I was thinking to myself last week, this Master Cleanse fast does really make my skin look and feel better, I was hit with an honest opinion from an outside source. Calvin, my youngest child was playing with the other neighborhood boys - a group of them ranging in age from 5-9. I called down to Calvin to ask him a question and he answered me, naturally addressing me as "Mom." To which one of the boys started laughing and said, “Mom? I thought she was your grandma!” So I rather think the fast has made me delirious from lack of food, and my earlier assessment of my skin was, ummm, unreliable. Edited to add: This also points to another facet of US culture. The age range of motherhood. I think Calvin’s friend’s mother was in her late teens or early 20’s when she had him. I was 35 when I had Calvin, so I am indeed closer to the age of the child’s grandmother than his mother.

The first book I've read this year is....

From Touching Rock Bottom To Touching The Nations by Nick Park. It's an interesting and encouraging account of how a young, alcoholic, inhalant-addicted punk from Ireland and England turned his life around through faith. I read it with great interest because I love biographies and stories of transformation and redemption (see Keith Green’s No Compromise and Brian “Head” Welch’s Save Me From Myself). Secondly, my interest was piqued by my husband, known fondly here as Big Daddy, having heard Nick Park speak at a Men’s Conference. He enjoyed Nick Park’s message at the conference immensely! We could both relate somewhat by having been teenage punks ourselves and all that went with it - partying, brawling, and varying degrees having a malcontented attitude with our lives. And then eventually with substance abuse issues. The book chronicles Nick Park’s life and transformation, and the many challenges he faced and overcame, both before and after his sobriety and spiritual change. From rubbing elbows with Sid Vicious to dedicating the babies of Nigerian refugees - it is an interesting chronicle! I recommend this book.

I'm also reading through the bible again this year, along with our denominational initiative, although I have opted to use the LifeJournal reading plan from YouVersion, found here.

Random New Year Ramble

"Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend, inside of a dog it's too dark to read."

Groucho Marx said that. Yesterday I asked my Siri to search the web for a book, and "she" quoted that. It made me laugh. I am on a modified version of the Master Cleanse Fast (you can google if you're curious). Big Daddy and I try to do some sort of special fasting and prayer at the onset of the new year, as an act of reverence toward God. It's a time of sober reflection, thankfulness, and seeking His will and direction for the new year. I find today difficult, but yesterday was not. I was awash with inspiration and ideas yesterday. Today I feel sluggish and have a headache (caffeine withdrawal, I suspect) and I am distracted by the macaroni and cheese the kids had for lunch. But it's just today, and a little challenge, and it will pass and I am sure tomorrow will be better.

Welcome 2013, A Rebooted Greeting

It's been a long time. I can't promise a successful or consistent reboot, but for today, I am here. Happy New Year. I sit here with a heart that is happy with the promise a new year brings. A fresh start and clean slate is always a nice and welcoming thing, like a newly sharpened pencil and an empty drawing pad. So, I am resolute with myself to continue and build upon some good things and healthier and better choices. For today, I'm involved with a bit of praying and fasting, listening to some wonderful classical music and I feel like the windows of my soul are letting in a welcome breeze that is fresh with hope and contentment. I can't quite write that, though, without saying my heart goes out to those who are unable to muster such hope right now, and my prayers are with and for them. So, to anyone who is still lurking about, this is the place where I chronicle my spiritual and artistic journey as one, little and rather low-key person. I am not a spectacular writer or artist, or incredibly witty or erudite, but I am sincere, honest and opinionated. And I like to write and draw.

“Ring out the old, ring in the new, Ring, happy bells, across the snow: The year is going, let him go; Ring out the false, ring in the true.”
-Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Real Mom

Now that is a cute and funny photo, but it got me thinking of a subject that is very close and important to my heart: Adoption. I would also like to take this opportunity to remind you that November is National Adoption month, with National Adoption Day falling on November 19th, see here.

I always bristle a little at the term "real mom" and I will explain why. I am adopted, and when many people find that out, they ask me if I know my real mom. Once in a while they say "real parents" but 97% of the time it's the mom they're the most curious about. It's natural to be curious and I know that people mean no disrespect when they say "real" parent. Here is how my reply goes:

Well, I actually consider the parents that raised me to be my "real parents" because they are the ones that were there every day of my life for all the colds and fevers, scraped knees, school plays, graduations, etc. If you mean do I know my biological parents, the answer is no. Though I do have a HUGE amount of affection and respect for them and their unselfish decision to give me up for adoption, I have never met them.

My parents had a very organic approach to the disclosure of adoption, and I simply recall always knowing I was adopted, it was never revealed to me at a certain age or anything like that. One of the dearest people in my life, my first babysitter Nan* says that my parents had these adoption storybooks, and when she'd babysit me, she'd read them and cry because it was so touching. I vaguely remember those books. My parents tried for children for about 10 years thorough various biological and medical means, and then the lengthy adoption process, so they were elated when they finally were able to adopt me and then my little brother.

Lately my two younger children, Calvin* (age 8) and Flora* (age 12) have been asking questions about my real mom. After doing my real mom spiel two times, I had a little epiphany and used Our Boy* that darn dog that they love so much. (The above picture reminded me of all this.) I asked Calvin and Flora, "Who is OurBoy's real family? Is it your old friend Sarah who's pet dog had the litter OurBoy came from? Or is it us, who adopted him when he was a little puppy and have been with him, taking care of him ever since? This drove the point of adoption home for them and helped them understand the distinction between biological and adoptive and what is "real." I mean to say that both are "real" but I believe it is important to make that distinction and give each kind of parent, both biological and adoptive, the proper respect and position within the life of the adoptee. Being a parent takes a great amount of unselfish love, I am blessed to say that I have experienced that kind love in some very special ways, through the woman who decided to give me up, and through the parents who took me in. Both kinds of parents are real. Whomever fulfilled the role of parent, in the day to day, year to year, decade to decade reality of life, well, to me that is actual and real in a way that makes biology, with all due respect, a smaller part of the equation in my life. I wouldn't be here, or be the person I have become without the decisions my adoptive and my biological parents made and the roles they fulfilled in my life. One is not more important than the other. You can't take out of the equation the huge, intensely personal decision my biological mother/parents made at the beginning of my life, nor the lifetime of care and parenting my adoptive parents undertook. I understand that there are different adoption experiences, which make this more of a complicated subject for many, I can only speak for myself.

Autumn Playlist Revisited

I'm in a mood for the music that for one reason or another reminds me of the Autumn season. This is something began compiling several years back, and added some and deleted some. What songs remind you of the Fall season? Why? Feel free to share as many or as few details as you like but definitely share the song and artist names so we can check them out.

Funny Friday

This is silly. I didn't LOL but I smiled real big and almost snickered a few times.

Hodgepodge & Funny Friday

What I've been eating/craving:



10 Songs I've Been Listening To Recently




Stuff that has made me laugh:




Umm, yeah but lose the apron.