Dear Mr. President:
I realize you are a busy and important man. I know you have much more pressing matters to attend to than listening to a lowly internet blogger. So to get right to the point, I offer not my own words, but those of Theodore Roosevelt: I want to see you shoot the way you shout.
Just last week, Mr. President, you poked fun at the Tea Party movement, evidenced in this quote from a story reported by ABC News reporters Karen Travers and Rachel Martin:
Speaking at a Democratic fundraiser tonight, President Obama touted his administration’s tax cuts and said that the recent tea party rallies across the nation have “amused” him.
“You would think they should be saying thank you,” the president said to applause.
Members of the audience shouted, “Thank you.”
I myself, am not a Tea Party supporter or detractor. At this point, I'm more of an interested observer. While I like the Tea Party movement's grassroots activism, I'm uneasy about the appearance of ties to Republican politicians. Once a movement marries itself to one political party, I think it ceases to be a movement of the people and becomes another tool in the political machine.
Now I'll grant you that Tea Party members sometimes make themselves easy targets for jokes. Still, I must say, Mr. President, that I'm concerned about what I see as your willingness to fall back on your powers of charm and persuasion rather than answering direct challenges presented by any segment of the American people. When you ran for office, you ran on a platform of "Change We Can Believe In." You presented yourself as a new breed of politician, one who would put the good of the country ahead of partisan politics. Many of us appreciated that stance. It felt like a breath of fresh air capable of sweeping away the cloud of partisan stench.
Unfortunately, thus far I've seen nothing more than politics as usual. Mr. President, you are a gifted and persuasive speaker. You have a natural charm and charisma that puts people at ease when you address them, whether in a large group or, presumably, one-on-one. Yet for all your talk of change and bipartisanship, your voting record in the Senate even before your election was something like 98% along party lines, more than almost any other senator. And in your administration thus far, there has been an alarming trend of poking fun at and even demonizing any detractors, regardless of whether they are politicians, members of right-leaning press or individual citizens.
This is not encouraging and it is little wonder then, that a recent survey from the Pew Research Center found that nearly 80% of Americans say "they can't trust Washington" and "have little faith that the massive federal bureaucracy can solve the nation's ills" (Quote from ynet news.com). Also interesting, is that while widely reported in international news sources, this poll result was difficult to find among American news agencies. Could it be that Americans as a whole, and our media in particular are being bullied into a position of not daring to criticize the current administration? It's a bit like junior high when no one dared to criticize the captain of the football team, even when his fly was down all during third period, for fear of the social repercussions.
In summary, Mr. President, I think you have some wonderful qualities that can make someone a strong and capable leader. But I think you have become too quick to assume the rightness of your every position and rely on those same qualities to shame your detractors rather than listen to them. This will not only lead you and your administration down a slippery slope, as some of those detractors are the same people who voted for you; it can potentially lead our country down the same slippery slope on the international stage.
So Mr. President, please, when someone challenges your position, just listen--really listen--to them. Even if they don't share your ideology, they might have a valid point. Oh, and if someone tells you your fly is down, be sure to check. You never know when they might be right.
Sincerely,
Josie Mintz
Monday, April 19, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
America's Next Top...Ghetto Mama??
OK, I admit it. I watch reality TV. In fact, I even enjoy it. One of my favorite secret vices is the reality show America's Next Top Model. This is the Tyra Banks vehicle where she and her cronies in the industry set themselves up as mentors for the next generation of would-be models. They hold nation-wide casting calls, and about a dozen lucky girls get to compete for the privilege of being represented by one of America's top modeling agencies.
The show is now in it's 14th "cycle" and at this point, it has definitely jumped the shark. In addition to the obligatory nude photo shoot they've also had the models pose as vampires in a bathtub of fake blood while wearing contacts that rendered them blind, and they've also had the models create "chemistry" with a comedian for a shoot. The comedian was wearing a tux. The models, of course, were clad in lingerie.
Now I admit that my years in the lower levels of the industry hardly qualify me as an expert. But even my limited experience tells me that these contrived shoots are over the top and would be very unlikely assignments for a successful model. Yet even with its ridiculous shoots and outrageous cast of characters (yes, I have a certain affection for Mr. Jay and Ms. Jay, both men) I find the show quirky and appealing.
Mind you, I would never recommend this show for anyone under the age of 16...maybe even 18. The show has never struck me as a proper place for young girls to learn how to be women, much less models. This week's episode, however, really stopped me in my tracks. This season's show features a group of young women that is divided decidedly down the middle. That middle, would be "the tracks." Yes, I mean that half the ladies are from what would be considered the upscale side of the tracks, and the other half are from what many would consider the wrong side of the tracks.
If you haven't watched reality TV, let me just clue you in to the fact that this is a common ploy. This is exactly why reality TV shows have casting directors. In any show, there are really only 2 or 3 viable winners. The rest are thrown in for drama. The formula is to take a bunch of people who, under normal circumstances, would never tolerate one another and throw them in a house together. The last one left standing is usually the winner.
So back to this week's episode. Three of the girls in particular, Angelea, Krysta, and Alasia are from the hood. They are very open about this, quite proud of it, in fact, so don't think I'm unfairly categorizing anyone. Angelea is especially combative. In fact, she was rejected in a past season because of her anger issues. She was allowed in this season because, apparently, she's had therapy. Frankly, I think she needs to ask for her money back from that therapist! This week, Angelea and her cohorts spoke, as always, in complete ghetto speak and were openly combative and even threatened the other contestants. The teaser for the show claimed that one of the models was going to get a dressing down from one of the judges. I thought, finally! Someone will point out how completely inappropriate these girls are.
Well, shame on me for thinking my favorite little vice would have some redeeming value! After a challenge that involved impressing a high-level purse designer at a fancy cocktail party, one of the upscale girls won. This caused our friend Angelea to lash out at all the girls not from her side of the tracks and attempt to bait them into fights. She was verbally abusive and downright cruel. Her cronies weren't much better, with one of them even threatening physical violence!
So now we come to the judging. First, the upscale girl who won the challenge was told her shoes made her look trashy. She replied with a surprised, "Really? I thought they looked good." Then came the final blow, not only did Angelea win for best picture of the week, the judges held her up as an example for all the other girls to follow! They claimed that while the poor girl who liked her own shoes was combative when criticized (Combative? Really? If that's combative I'd hate to see downright angry!) but Angelea was "keepin' it real" and all the other girls should learn to be as real as Angelea, Krysta, and Alasia.
This left me not only flabbergasted, but incensed. Now I admit, I get a kick out of reverting to a little ghetto-speak from time to time, but it's just an act, a lark for fun. Yet these judges (specifically one judge who is about as phony wanna-be drag queen as they come) sent a message to everyone watching the show that the people to emulate are those who speak inarticulately, who are openly combative, and who treat anyone in the way of their goals with complete contempt. Now I am not naive. I know that just because I would never let my children, especially a daughter, watch this show; that doesn't mean that there aren't thousands of impressionable young girls tuning in each week. Now, not only are we bombarding these girls with Bratz dolls and clothing designed way to old for their size, we are now sending them the message loud and clear: "If it ain't ghetto, it ain't real!" Then we wonder why teen pregnancy rates are up, girls are now almost as likely as boys to engage in physical altercations, and an alarming number of young women are joining street gangs. Gee, now how did that happen?
Now before you accuse me of slamming any particular race or socio-economic status, you should know that I firmly believe that one's circumstances need not dictate one's identity. I've known plenty of individuals, male and female, who have overcome terrible life circumstances to achieve great things in business and academia. We've all heard of politicians, athletes, actors and musicians who came from the most humble of beginnings. There are countless others who may not have achieved high levels of fame and fortune, but have become respectable, hard-working members of society. What you become has less to do with your surroundings and much more to do with your life choices. That's the message I want to pass down to my children. And that's the message I wish more people in positions of influence, like Tyra Banks, would pass down to all the impressionable young minds who look up to them.
The show is now in it's 14th "cycle" and at this point, it has definitely jumped the shark. In addition to the obligatory nude photo shoot they've also had the models pose as vampires in a bathtub of fake blood while wearing contacts that rendered them blind, and they've also had the models create "chemistry" with a comedian for a shoot. The comedian was wearing a tux. The models, of course, were clad in lingerie.
Now I admit that my years in the lower levels of the industry hardly qualify me as an expert. But even my limited experience tells me that these contrived shoots are over the top and would be very unlikely assignments for a successful model. Yet even with its ridiculous shoots and outrageous cast of characters (yes, I have a certain affection for Mr. Jay and Ms. Jay, both men) I find the show quirky and appealing.
Mind you, I would never recommend this show for anyone under the age of 16...maybe even 18. The show has never struck me as a proper place for young girls to learn how to be women, much less models. This week's episode, however, really stopped me in my tracks. This season's show features a group of young women that is divided decidedly down the middle. That middle, would be "the tracks." Yes, I mean that half the ladies are from what would be considered the upscale side of the tracks, and the other half are from what many would consider the wrong side of the tracks.
If you haven't watched reality TV, let me just clue you in to the fact that this is a common ploy. This is exactly why reality TV shows have casting directors. In any show, there are really only 2 or 3 viable winners. The rest are thrown in for drama. The formula is to take a bunch of people who, under normal circumstances, would never tolerate one another and throw them in a house together. The last one left standing is usually the winner.
So back to this week's episode. Three of the girls in particular, Angelea, Krysta, and Alasia are from the hood. They are very open about this, quite proud of it, in fact, so don't think I'm unfairly categorizing anyone. Angelea is especially combative. In fact, she was rejected in a past season because of her anger issues. She was allowed in this season because, apparently, she's had therapy. Frankly, I think she needs to ask for her money back from that therapist! This week, Angelea and her cohorts spoke, as always, in complete ghetto speak and were openly combative and even threatened the other contestants. The teaser for the show claimed that one of the models was going to get a dressing down from one of the judges. I thought, finally! Someone will point out how completely inappropriate these girls are.
Well, shame on me for thinking my favorite little vice would have some redeeming value! After a challenge that involved impressing a high-level purse designer at a fancy cocktail party, one of the upscale girls won. This caused our friend Angelea to lash out at all the girls not from her side of the tracks and attempt to bait them into fights. She was verbally abusive and downright cruel. Her cronies weren't much better, with one of them even threatening physical violence!
So now we come to the judging. First, the upscale girl who won the challenge was told her shoes made her look trashy. She replied with a surprised, "Really? I thought they looked good." Then came the final blow, not only did Angelea win for best picture of the week, the judges held her up as an example for all the other girls to follow! They claimed that while the poor girl who liked her own shoes was combative when criticized (Combative? Really? If that's combative I'd hate to see downright angry!) but Angelea was "keepin' it real" and all the other girls should learn to be as real as Angelea, Krysta, and Alasia.
This left me not only flabbergasted, but incensed. Now I admit, I get a kick out of reverting to a little ghetto-speak from time to time, but it's just an act, a lark for fun. Yet these judges (specifically one judge who is about as phony wanna-be drag queen as they come) sent a message to everyone watching the show that the people to emulate are those who speak inarticulately, who are openly combative, and who treat anyone in the way of their goals with complete contempt. Now I am not naive. I know that just because I would never let my children, especially a daughter, watch this show; that doesn't mean that there aren't thousands of impressionable young girls tuning in each week. Now, not only are we bombarding these girls with Bratz dolls and clothing designed way to old for their size, we are now sending them the message loud and clear: "If it ain't ghetto, it ain't real!" Then we wonder why teen pregnancy rates are up, girls are now almost as likely as boys to engage in physical altercations, and an alarming number of young women are joining street gangs. Gee, now how did that happen?
Now before you accuse me of slamming any particular race or socio-economic status, you should know that I firmly believe that one's circumstances need not dictate one's identity. I've known plenty of individuals, male and female, who have overcome terrible life circumstances to achieve great things in business and academia. We've all heard of politicians, athletes, actors and musicians who came from the most humble of beginnings. There are countless others who may not have achieved high levels of fame and fortune, but have become respectable, hard-working members of society. What you become has less to do with your surroundings and much more to do with your life choices. That's the message I want to pass down to my children. And that's the message I wish more people in positions of influence, like Tyra Banks, would pass down to all the impressionable young minds who look up to them.
Monday, April 12, 2010
An Addendum
It occurs to me that my most recent blog post may portray me as having a negative attitude toward adoption. If so, I'd like to reiterate that this is not at all the case. I believe adoption is a wonderful way to create a family, and, as I said, I am currently in the process.
My point was that some people may see news reports or pictures of children in underprivileged countries and choose adoption as a misguided attempt to help those children. Adoption is a wonderful and beautiful option, but you must be prepared to commit long-term. Just like marriage, it is not a decision to enter into lightly.
For those who would like to help children in need, but don't feel called to adoption, here are some links that may be helpful.
Shaohannah's Hope
http://www.showhope.org/
Bright Hope International
http://www.brighthope.org/
World Vision International
http://www.wvi.org/wvi/wviweb.nsf
Heifer International
http://www.heifer.org/#
Compassion International
http://www.compassion.com/
Please note that I am in no way endorsing particular charitable organizations. These are just a few that I have come across over the years. Before giving to any organization you should do your homework and make sure that the organization is reputable and fits with your personal beliefs.
My point was that some people may see news reports or pictures of children in underprivileged countries and choose adoption as a misguided attempt to help those children. Adoption is a wonderful and beautiful option, but you must be prepared to commit long-term. Just like marriage, it is not a decision to enter into lightly.
For those who would like to help children in need, but don't feel called to adoption, here are some links that may be helpful.
Shaohannah's Hope
http://www.showhope.org/
Bright Hope International
http://www.brighthope.org/
World Vision International
http://www.wvi.org/wvi/wviweb.nsf
Heifer International
http://www.heifer.org/#
Compassion International
http://www.compassion.com/
Please note that I am in no way endorsing particular charitable organizations. These are just a few that I have come across over the years. Before giving to any organization you should do your homework and make sure that the organization is reputable and fits with your personal beliefs.
The Bigger Picture
If a man take no thought about what is distant, he will find sorrow near at hand.
-Confucius
I admit it. By nature, I tend to be an impulsive person. I'm hard-wired to be extremely emotional, and I've spent a lifetime combatting the waves of that emotional sea that would have me turn this way or that (Buy this! Move here!) on a whim. However, if my emotionally driven mistakes have taught me anything, it's this. While being led by your can help you identify and even realize your dreams; you darn well better keep your head engaged in the process, or you risk bringing a world of hurt upon yourself and others.
I can think of no better example of this principle than the adoption stories in the news lately. First, we had the story of the Baptist missionaries in Haiti. Unless you've been living in a cave, you know this story inside and out. To sum up, a group of Baptist missionaries tried to take a group of children they claimed were orphans over the border into the Dominican Republic. It turns out, not only did they have no paperwork for the children, the majority of the children weren't even orphans. They had been turned over to the missionaries by their families based on the promise of a better life and continued familial contact.
If I were to categorize this story, I would file it under "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." I don't care how altruistic the missionaries' motives might have been. They got caught up in a whirlwind of emotion and rushed headlong into a catastrophic situation without considering the consequences. They claim to have been starting an orphanage, but do not seem to have bothered to educate themselves on the international laws governing their actions, not to mention the psychological ramifications of taking a group of children in a crisis situation and removing them from the only stable connection they had left. Considering "what is distant"? I'm not sure they even considered beyond the next week.
Now in current news, we have another story of adoption plans gone awry. A Tennessee mother decided she could no longer parent her 7-year-old Russian-born adopted son. She placed a note in his backpack, put him on a plane, and shipped him back to Russia. The woman claims that the Russian orphanage workers had lied to her and that the boy exhibited violent and psychotic behavior. She further claims that an attorney she found and communicated with online advised her that this method of nullifying the adoption was legitimate.
Once again, I have to ask, what on earth was this person thinking? Adoptions do disrupt, it's true. It's also traumatic and heart-wrenching for all involved. However, there are concrete steps in place to mitigate the pain and suffering involved. The woman in Tennessee could have contacted the agency she used for the adoption (one source does mention that she used an agency) and expressed her desire to disrupt the adoption. A reputable agency would have asked her questions, tried to help the family through counseling, or ultimately placed the child with a family experienced in handling the boy's particular issues. Sticking an unaccompanied minor on a plane with a note saying, essentially, that you don't want to be his mom anymore is unconscionable.
Obviously, once again, someone didn't count the cost. And both these stories have a personal connection for me, because I am a parent currently waiting for the referral of a child through international adoption. So if I seem angry at these individuals, I am. That is my bias. In each case, all it would have taken to avoid an international incident was to slow down, do some research, and think rationally and long-term. Instead, they acted in a rash and irrisponsible manner and the consequences for their actions may impact all of us engaged in international adoption.
There are many, many wonderful children here and abroad who are in need of loving families. One google search alone will bring up thousands upon thousands pictures that will tug your heartstrings relentlessly. And while it is right to want to help children in need, adoption is not the right choice for everyone, and it is not a decision to be taken lightly. In any adoption, you will be taking a child from the only home he/she has ever known and thrusting him/her into a new and strange environment. Add to that the baggage involved in coming from an institutional setting, and you multiply the potential trauma exponentially. This is not to say that most adoptions don't work out well. In fact, the majority of adoptions end in a wonderful, loving family; which is why stories like the above make the news. They are an anomaly. I have personally known families on both sides of the fence, families with successful adoptions and families who have experienced disruption. The most important factor in determining success, besides knowing your limitations, seems to be proceeding with an open heart, but also a teachable mind.
-Confucius
I admit it. By nature, I tend to be an impulsive person. I'm hard-wired to be extremely emotional, and I've spent a lifetime combatting the waves of that emotional sea that would have me turn this way or that (Buy this! Move here!) on a whim. However, if my emotionally driven mistakes have taught me anything, it's this. While being led by your can help you identify and even realize your dreams; you darn well better keep your head engaged in the process, or you risk bringing a world of hurt upon yourself and others.
I can think of no better example of this principle than the adoption stories in the news lately. First, we had the story of the Baptist missionaries in Haiti. Unless you've been living in a cave, you know this story inside and out. To sum up, a group of Baptist missionaries tried to take a group of children they claimed were orphans over the border into the Dominican Republic. It turns out, not only did they have no paperwork for the children, the majority of the children weren't even orphans. They had been turned over to the missionaries by their families based on the promise of a better life and continued familial contact.
If I were to categorize this story, I would file it under "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." I don't care how altruistic the missionaries' motives might have been. They got caught up in a whirlwind of emotion and rushed headlong into a catastrophic situation without considering the consequences. They claim to have been starting an orphanage, but do not seem to have bothered to educate themselves on the international laws governing their actions, not to mention the psychological ramifications of taking a group of children in a crisis situation and removing them from the only stable connection they had left. Considering "what is distant"? I'm not sure they even considered beyond the next week.
Now in current news, we have another story of adoption plans gone awry. A Tennessee mother decided she could no longer parent her 7-year-old Russian-born adopted son. She placed a note in his backpack, put him on a plane, and shipped him back to Russia. The woman claims that the Russian orphanage workers had lied to her and that the boy exhibited violent and psychotic behavior. She further claims that an attorney she found and communicated with online advised her that this method of nullifying the adoption was legitimate.
Once again, I have to ask, what on earth was this person thinking? Adoptions do disrupt, it's true. It's also traumatic and heart-wrenching for all involved. However, there are concrete steps in place to mitigate the pain and suffering involved. The woman in Tennessee could have contacted the agency she used for the adoption (one source does mention that she used an agency) and expressed her desire to disrupt the adoption. A reputable agency would have asked her questions, tried to help the family through counseling, or ultimately placed the child with a family experienced in handling the boy's particular issues. Sticking an unaccompanied minor on a plane with a note saying, essentially, that you don't want to be his mom anymore is unconscionable.
Obviously, once again, someone didn't count the cost. And both these stories have a personal connection for me, because I am a parent currently waiting for the referral of a child through international adoption. So if I seem angry at these individuals, I am. That is my bias. In each case, all it would have taken to avoid an international incident was to slow down, do some research, and think rationally and long-term. Instead, they acted in a rash and irrisponsible manner and the consequences for their actions may impact all of us engaged in international adoption.
There are many, many wonderful children here and abroad who are in need of loving families. One google search alone will bring up thousands upon thousands pictures that will tug your heartstrings relentlessly. And while it is right to want to help children in need, adoption is not the right choice for everyone, and it is not a decision to be taken lightly. In any adoption, you will be taking a child from the only home he/she has ever known and thrusting him/her into a new and strange environment. Add to that the baggage involved in coming from an institutional setting, and you multiply the potential trauma exponentially. This is not to say that most adoptions don't work out well. In fact, the majority of adoptions end in a wonderful, loving family; which is why stories like the above make the news. They are an anomaly. I have personally known families on both sides of the fence, families with successful adoptions and families who have experienced disruption. The most important factor in determining success, besides knowing your limitations, seems to be proceeding with an open heart, but also a teachable mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)