Slide Show

 I’m streaming Pandora through my 54-inch tv connected to my laptop…and my slide show screensaver is flickering past on the big screen.  I'm vacuuming.  I catch a picture or two out of the corner of my eye.  Soon, I'm rooted in front of the screen, alternating between wide smiles, pursed-lipped chagrin, and...mists of tears.  Tears of nostalgia...of longing.  Emotions that I never would have associated with my lonely life in the wilds of the PDX exurbs...

It’s funny how, now that I’m not there anymore, Scappoose has taken on a whole different character. 

While I was there, especially in the last few years, it felt like a heavy weight that I couldn’t scrape off…like a place I couldn’t wait to put behind me.  It felt like I was trudging, one foot in front of the other, straining toward the day I could be free of it.

Now, I look at those pictures…pictures of my home, my yard, my birds, my walks, my drives, the Island, my holiday decorations, almost two decades worth…

And Scappoose has become a happy-sad place.  A place where I had things I loved because I HAD TO.  The loneliness and isolation drove me, to create pockets of beauty and peace and comfortable solitude.  And to go out into the natural world and let it soothe and comfort me.   

I loved those little bits of life in Scappoose.  And that was part of the problem…nobody else did.  They were mine alone.  But they WERE beautiful.  And I will miss them.  

D Day

If You Should Comment...

I'll be doing my internet thing here at "Coming to Terms" from now on.  

I had some friends tell me last week that they had tried to leave comments, but the comments had "disappeared."

Just to clear that up...I have "comment moderation" activated on the blog.  This means that any comments left more than five days after a piece is posted are emailed to me first, so that I can approve them and allow them to post.  This is not because I want to censor my friends...  It's because there is (or was, anyway) a phenomenon here on blogger where stupid spam "comments," advertising porn sites and the like, would descend on older posts, and I would then have to go through and delete them.  

So, rest assured that if you DO comment, I will see it...and so will everyone else once I "approve" it.

Home

Four months ago, our realtor told us this was the room that was going to sell our house.  

  

I'll admit, I loved that room.  It was the heart of our house...an ever-changing gallery.  A place to display so many pretty things that I loved.  It was warm, it was comfortable, it was beautiful.  It was...home.  

 

But we had to leave that home behind.  For so many good reasons.  For all that it was home, it was far away from...everything.  And lonely. And big and dusty and...just too much.  Too much for two old farts to hold together any more.  

So we said hello to this:

And goodbye to this:

We had to lose literally half our stuff, since the new house is half the size of the old.  There was SO much stuff that "no longer served," so it was relatively easy to send away.  But also, a lot of stuff I did love, but knew there would be no place for in the tiny home; that was not so easy. 

I had in mind to make a completely fresh start.  To create new spaces for the new home, with new and different arrangements of the stuff I had left.  I unpacked, and I arranged, and I re-arranged...  And in the end, the arrangements that I settled upon looked SO much like smaller versions of my old rooms.  Which was okay.  Because with each addition of some familiar piece I had been able to keep, or been unable to lose... 

The house felt more...

...like mine.  

MY house.

Filled with MY stuff.

MY magic. MY comfort.  MY sanctuary.

I am home.

Closing the (Face)Book on a Chapter of My Life

So I’ve gone and done it. 

I deactivated my Facebook account. 

I don’t know why I had never seriously entertained the notion before.  I’ve been less than impressed with FB for a long time.  But the addiction to that online connection made it impossible for me to even consider living without it.  Or that living without it might even be a good thing.

Online connection has been a vital part of my life for almost 16 years.  I discovered infant social media in 2003, at a time when I was desperate for connection to ANYONE.  When I look at the whole experience in my rearview mirror, I realize that it was only during maybe the first five of those years that the connection was real and strong and vital, challenging and alive.  The rest of the time has been spent wondering what happened to the connection, and trying every which way to get it back. 

After the demise of AOL J-land, Facebook seemed the place where everybody went.  So I went there, too.  And rode the gradual metamorphosis of social media from what it was to what it is now.  Unfortunately, I have been all too willing to cling to the aspects that most closely resembled the cherished early days of innocent, intense internet interactions.  It took me a loooong time to finally understand that those days, and those interactions, are gone for good and all.  What’s left is the shells of those relationships disappeared under the heaps of mundanity and inanity we now “share” with our internet “friends”—who are not really that (friends) anymore. 

But it was only in the past few months that the Universe started giving me signs that Facebook was no longer a place for me to be.  When “friends” and pages began to delete conversations I had been part of, or at the very least, my comments from a thread, I realized I no longer had a place in that community….or, I no longer had a community in that place.  I had to seriously examine my presence there.

And then, there was the Nancy Pelosi video.  The straw that broke the camel’s back.  The video is purposely altered to make the Speaker of the House appear drunk, or somehow altered/incompetent.  And was introduced to and perpetuated on social media by none other than our illustrious toddler-in-chief.

When pressed on the subject by ACTUAL news media, Facebook representatives claimed the video would not be banned, and that FB would allow people to “make up their own minds.”

Facebook knows, anybody with a brain knows, certainly the masterminds of the right wing propaganda machine know, that social media have invited—forced, even—way too many people to do WAAAY t0o much “making up their own minds.”  So much so that FB is now easily weaponized by any entity—politician, preacher, criminal, enemy-of-the-state—wishing to attack or destroy someone or something.  Yes, Facebook is primarily a weapon.  A weapon that no one knows how to control, but everyone knows how to manipulate.  An extremely lethal weapon, dropped into the hands of anyone with an internet connection and a keyboard.

And because there is a goldmine of money involved in the trafficking of this weapon, insignificant details like its threat to human life, society and the survival of our nation are sidestepped, downplayed and ignored. 

This was when I realized I couldn’t be a part of it anymore.  Any more than I can be a part of “religious” practices that are no more than codified ways to control large populations of humans beings through fear and violence.  Power in the hands of the few to control the many.  

When I stated my intention to leave Facebook, I was told that one person leaving was not going to make any difference to FB…was not going to inspire them to change their policies and clean up their act.  I agree…it will not.

But my decision isn’t about that.  It’s about standing up for what I believe.  It’s about being able to look at myself in the mirror and know that I have not compromised my beliefs, not lowered my standards; that I will not go on sidestepping and excusing inexcusable policy because refusing to do so might cause me to let go of something I have held on to so hard for so long.  Something that, when you take a close look at it, is not worth holding on to quite that hard, nor for any longer than...yesterday.  

I won't say it wasn't a difficult step to take...I know there are folks I "met" 16 years ago on AOL journals that I will probably never hear from again.  People that have been a part of my life; people that I have cared about.  That is hard...that makes me sad.  But, in the end, I think it was time to make that move. 

So, yeah…this is only my second day without Facebook.  And I’m already noticing how much more time I have.  I’ve been wondering lately why I never seem to have enough time to get all the things done I need to do.  I thought it was a function of growing older and slower.  But, no…  It appears that wasting one or two or three hours every day "checking in" on social media definitely puts a dent in one’s productivity. 

I have WAY too much to do right now to waste time dicking around on the internet.  And now, I have a couple more hours a day to accomplish the real life things that need doing.

So I’d say, so far, this is a win.  We'll see how it goes from here on.   

  

Don't Go There

I started out with the intention of posting this on Facebook.  And then I thought better of it.  Though I don't get a lot of attention there, either, there is the theoretical possibility that people who don't need to see this aspect of me will see the post.  And I don't think that would be good.

Got to thinking about myself this afternoon. Who am I, who/what do I love...who loves me? I know, that seems like an awfully inward place to set up camp...but it forced me to look at things I don't normally look at or see.

Primarily...I see that I must suck at relationships. The people in my life...which consist of people who pretty much have to be there--my sisters, my husband... I don't think I invest enough emotional energy in them to make them understand their value to me.   So maybe I reap what I sow.

But, more than that, I see that I don't ask THEM to invest emotional energy in ME. I don't ask for strokes or praise or attaboys. I spend all my energy just trying not to drive people away...(which I seem to have a talent for.)  I don't want anything more out of the people in my life than for them NOT to make me go away, or NOT to walk away from me and leave me alone. I don't know...that's a pretty low bar, isn't it? Perhaps if that's all I ask, that's all anybody will ever believe I'm worth.

A million years ago, when we were young and still very much "in love," my significant other said, "I love you!" ...and I asked "Why?"

And he couldn't give me an answer. 

It bothered me then.

It bothers me even more now.

I don't know.  Maybe if he'd answered the question 40 years ago, I could try to go back to doing whatever it was I did to make him fall in love with me.  Maybe he is reaping what he sowed.  

Maybe we both are.

I don't want to fight with anyone anymore.  I went through that with my sisters AND my husband...serious shit that almost ended us.  But we held on, and emerged...

...in this place.  Of peace and tolerance.

It's nice.  It's safe.  It's quiet.

But it's singularly unsatisfying.  It doesn't meet my deepest need, that I try not to think about.  

I really need someone to tell me I'm good.  At something.  At anything.  Or at nothing.  Just...good.  Worthy.  A positive presence, rather than the invisible one I am trying (and failing) to be.

Hanging by a thread.      

I know this post is self-pitying drivel inspired by stress...  But I also know that, so far, seven people have read it...and haven't even bothered to ask if I'm ok.  And that feels...weird. 

 

Cafe de la Rue Photos

And So It Begins...

Four women have announced their candidacy for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.  Considering what happened to Hillary Clinton in 2016, I admire their courage.  I suspect, however, they are laboring under some delusions when it comes to how any woman who is not Hillary Clinton will be treated by American media, the traditional white male establishment, and the patriarchy-conditioned American public-at-large.

I think these women believe on some level that Mrs. Clinton was the object of unique misogyny, due to her personal history and having been married to a very public philanderer who also happened to be POTUS.  If Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Kirsten Gillibrand and Liz Warren truly believe that they will be somehow immune from attacks based upon their gender, they are in for a rude awakening.  In fact, the opening salvos have already been launched.

One particularly galling attack was directed toward Amy Klobuchar, the thrice-elected senior senator from Minnesota.  Now, I don’t know much about Klobuchar.  I can even say I might never have heard of her before she announced her candidacy.  But all I really need to know is that she is a woman, a woman who has been in one position of power or another for more than thirty years.  And I can know the tightrope she has been walking for that entire time.  Because I have walked that same thin line.  The line every woman who aspires to managing other people walks Every. Damn. Day.

Apparently, some ex-employees chose to share their harsh criticisms of Klobuchar’s management style with the press—anonymously, of course.  One can only wonder how much they were compensated, and by whom, to share their horror stories of the bitch boss from hell. 

I had some go-‘rounds on social media about this.  The consensus seems to have sorted out to, “NO ONE should treat employees like this.  Klobuchar shouldn’t get a pass just because she’s a woman.”  To which my reaction was, “Are you kidding?  Not only will she NOT get a pass, she’ll be called out by every person—male or female—who ever got anywhere near her and had their nose nudged out of joint by something she did or said.  Because she’s a woman."  And because she’s a woman, there will be legions more folks going public with tales of "abuse" than there would ever be hiding in the shadows of a male manager’s career.  Trust me.

Following is my soliloquy on the subject, first written as a FB comment on a friend’s posting about Klobuchar’s offenses. It was inspired by the comments of a gay male friend of this friend who went on a bender about how Klobuchar was a horrible person, and it wasn’t sexism to call her out on mistreating people who worked for her.  Made me see a little red…

“I read an article the other day about “whitesplaining” racism to black people.  The same dynamic occurs when men attempt to “mansplain” sexism to women.  There is too much tendency for people who are convicted by sensitive truths to change the narrative of a phenomenon that they themselves have never and will never experience.  In short, no man can or should EVER try to explain, defend, downplay or deny sexism to ME.  Sorry, gents…you have absolutely NO IDEA what you’re talking about.

“As a woman who found herself in positions of responsibility and/or authority several times during her working life, I can state without a doubt that expectations of the behavior of female bosses are markedly different—and markedly more ridiculous—than those of male bosses.  Women are expected to be soft, measured, empathetic, collaborative, and basically rule by committee.  Any female whose attitude is, “This is what needs to be done, and this is how we’re going to do it” is skewered as bitchy, bossy, “unlikable”…choose your negative adjective.  God forbid a woman, as a boss, just tell her staff what she wants them to do, rather than asking politely if someone would please like to take on this task.  Are men held to this same kind of standard?  I think not.  Being a woman in a position of authority is not for the faint of heart.  This contributes greatly to the scarcity of women in executive roles in our business world.  Many very capable women just don’t want to subject themselves to this ingrained double standard. 

“Another phenomenon I encountered late in my career was that employees became more and more demanding of “consideration” by authority figures.  By the time I closed my restaurant, I was at my wit’s end with new employees just wanting to show up on the job and do…whatever; who were deeply offended by anyone trying to actually tell them what to do, whether it was myself or my more experienced staff members who were assigned to train them.  Imagine being branded as an “abusive” boss just because you were attempting to train staff and give them direction.  My point is, often times (and this seems to be happening more and more lately) employees come into a job with very specific notions about how they think they should be treated…especially if the boss is female.  Women are expected to be kind and soft and…gullible is the word that comes to mind.  We should not have high standards or expectations, and we should accept any excuse if an employee can’t/chooses not to perform.  And if a non-performing employee does quit or get fired, that ex-employee doesn’t take the blame for not being able to deal with the culture of a workplace.  Their inability to succeed will be because it was a terrible job or the boss was a bitch.

“I don’t know what Amy Klobuchar is accused of doing/saying to her staff that is considered “abusive.”  What I do know is that my hackles are raised any time a woman’s management style is held under greater scrutiny and subjected to an entirely different set of standards than her male counterparts.  I suffered through that crap for decades, and I WILL give the woman the benefit of the doubt every time, because I have been there.” 

So, Mesdames Harris, Klobuchar, Gillibrand, and Warren…

Hitch up your big-girl panties and grab a really big umbrella. 

Because the shit is going to hit the fan, and it’s going to come at you at 100 miles per hour. 

We who have been there are right behind you. 

      

Humans Suck as Nature's Keepers

Here is a FB conversation I wanted to keep for posterity.  

I belong to a few "nature" pages, one of them being "Pacific Northwest Birders."

Like any other group that purports to be an association of people who "know" about something or "love" something, birders can be smug, bossy, superior and ruthless, and are not particularly reticent about putting these characteristics on public display.  

Over 100 years ago, some idiot got the bright idea that they wanted to have all the birds mentioned in Shakespeare's works released in Central Park.  Two of those European birds--starlings and English Sparrows--have flourished so well in the New World that they have spread in gigantic numbers across the continental US, to the chagrin of purist naturalists who are convinced that this has been an ecological disaster for native species that have been displaced or somehow negatively affected in the process.

So, these poor birds have been the object of a hatred and ire for decades.  I remember my grandfather showing 10-year-old me how he had built special birdhouses to attract house sparrows, in which he would trap them and then shake them to death, presumably for the pure and laudable motive of "protecting" native species.  I was appalled then, and am STILL appalled that there are supposedly educated, ecologically-minded adults who, 50 years later, subscribe to that cruel and violent solution to MAN'S ill-advised intervention with Nature.

I have had several debates about this question with the idiots, I mean, my fellow birders, on FB.  Following is the transcript of one of those debates:          

FB guy: I know that I wasn’t answering your question, just adding to KL’s information about House Sparrows effect on bluebirds. As for your comment, we as humans really screwed up and it is our fault, so we should be doing everything to get rid of House Sparrows. We should not be worrying about killing “innocent” birds or persecuting another creature. Whatever can be done to benefit bluebirds should be done no matter what.

Me: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. IMO, human beings are entirely too willing to kill "innocent" anything, for whatever reasons we deem valid. I maintain that this is NOT our right. It is not up to us to make conscious choices of which species should live and which should die.

FB Guy: I think we should start viewing how things might end up in the long run. Will bluebirds ever be seen in the Willamette Valley ever again because of House Sparrows? If we don’t do anything, what will the impact on the Western Bluebird population be in the valley? I think it is questions like these that need to be addressed and pondered over. I am with you on that it is sad and maybe cruel to kill these innocent creatures, but benefitting the native species should be top priority when it comes to bringing bluebird populations up in the Portland area.

FB Gal: so while your rationale comes from an obviously larger scope of the world view, many of us who are conservationist or work in the environmental restoration field will tell you they are not just harmless creatures. They are not native here and we had Western Bluebirds in the outer areas of Portland metro area when I was growing up ...up until the late 70's depending on where you were. And things do change that does NOT mean always for the better. House Sparrows do not provide to the ecosystem the way that bluebirds do as they evolved in this area.

Also House Sparrows cause harm to other species who they out compete. They are aggressive birds and push many other species out of nesting spaces.and I think Weaver Finch is the correct distinction for these guys. Hopefully no one will post a picture of a starling lest the conservation get really ugly.

Me: All very well thought out, from the point of view of humans who have learned to be very scientific and convincing/convinced of their "duty" to act as if they are very naturally in charge of which creatures are "worthy" and which are not. There's nothing I could possibly say to convince you of your error. Let's just say I don't buy into your conviction that humans should be in charge of this sort of "environmental restoration", which I am perfectly free not to do.

FB Gal: Actually we are trying to rectify NOT doing what nature intended. We are trying to put back into place systems that were nature created. So no we are not dictating what is best more trying to throw ourselves on nature's mercy if we try to put back what she had in place. so although scientific based on natures blueprint. And you are right you will never convince many of us that we should not correct our errors and restore what nature intended.

Me: Nature embraces her own. Were I Nature, I would have a hard time associating "mercy" with a plan to exterminate one species in favor of another, no matter how the species came to be where they are.

FB Guy #2: you may not know that these weaver finches were introduced to the US by a Shakespeare fan who decided that we should have all the birds mentioned in the Bard's plays here in America. 150 years later we have these European birds everywhere, displacing the natives

Me: I am aware of the history. I am also aware that the original "offense" took place over 100 years ago. I'm not arguing that the action was an ecological blunder. My beef is with the attitude so many humans have taken against the poor birds whose only sin has been to flourish in their new environment. Human beings are the only "sinners" here...but they seem to think that the damage done by the sin of humans will somehow be absolved by punishing the birds. In this case, as always, two wrongs do not make a right.

Hmmm.... Europeans displacing the natives.... If we want to follow the reasoning that this is an ecological wrong that must be made right, perhaps WE should all go back to Europe, or wherever we came from...?

FB Gal: while there are some that would applaud that thought going back to Europe as we did ruin things here, we are still righting the wrongs we committed towards the indigenous folks should we stop that since it occurred more than 100 years ago? I never suggested eradicating house sparrows and starlings as that is impossible at this point, but I will encourage ways to dissuade them from nesting, etc. I assume you have issues with all efforts to save animal species. Do you suggest we just quit trying and let whatever happens happen? What if that means allowing the web to collapse as we allowed critters to become extinct not knowing their tie to other critters, plants, etc?

Me: I do not have an issue with "all efforts to save animal species." But I do believe that it is NEVER ok to KILL animals in order to manipulate nature into some state of order that human beings have decreed is "proper." YOU might personally say that you don't believe in killing starlings and house sparrows, but you and I both know that there are those who have taken the "discouragement" philosophy as license to kill these birds whenever they encounter them. There is something sick and twisted about a species that will concoct "reasonable" and "scientific" excuses to kill off other creatures. Human beings are so prone to indulge in that behavior, that they habitually even come up with "reasonable" excuses to kill off "unacceptable" members of their own species. Humans have not historically demonstrated good judgment on questions of who/what should be allowed to live and who/what should not. They would be the LAST creatures to whom I would entrust that responsibility.

And a couple of days later, I discovered THIS article on the internet, put out by the Portland Audubon Society...which proves my point in spades:

Baker County Oregon Plans to Kill Ravens to Save Sage Grouse 

The geniuses in some stinky little backwater county in Oregon have decided that HUMAN-CAUSED raven overpopulation is threatening endangered sage grouse, so their plan to eliminate thousands of ravens in the next three years consists of putting out poisoned eggs for the ravens to eat, killing the ravens (and, I would expect, anything else that came upon the poison bait, plus anything that fed on sickened ravens or raven carcasses...)  

How to even begin commenting on such a stupid, irresponsible, needlessly murderous policy? 

Mankind.  Embraces any excuse...ANY EXCUSE...to assert dominance over other creatures through MURDER.

SMDH...