Rachel’s Musings

As if I had planned it that way, I did my 7th uphill walk on the 7th day of the 7th month…. We’ve raised almost $600 (we’re – appropriately – $7 short)! We got $400 more to go to reach my goal of raising $1,000 to support the work of the Alternatives to Marriage Project. If you haven’t done so already, you can donate online or give me a check or cash. If you’ve done so already thank you!

I learned today that I don’t find all Against the Grain podcasts interesting. I started out with one that sounded interesting – talking about how US consumers have supported the US empire – but when I realized that I was more interested in beating up Muni because buses were passing me every minute or so, I decided it was time to switch.      Continue reading this post » » »

Freedom: the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.
Independence: free from outside control; not depending on anothers’ authority. Not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence.
(Source: Oxford American Dictionary)

On this day designated to celebrate the declaration of independence of the United States from Britain, I’ve been thinking about what independence and freedom mean both on a personal and a political level. The word “freedom” has been so misused – from the freedom to drive as fast as we want to via freedom fighters to the freedom to marry (which is ridiculed nicely here). To me freedom does not mean to be allowed to go down the well-trodden road, to live the status quo. That’s easy. To me freedom means to be supported in going down the new and narrow path, to create new ways of living without being told that this is wrong or undoable but rather by being supported with the basics, like a livable wage and health care. This means that I have the freedom to be single without the negative consequences of not getting the 1,100+ rights married folks enjoy. It includes the freedom to leave my job if it isn’t satisfying without the negative consequence of loosing my health insurance. Without a fair and equitable social safety net, freedom is impossible because we cannot freely choose to avoid the status quo. Many will argue that we can choose, we just have to accept the consequences. True. I am free to cut off my arm, too. The consequences of exercising our freedom by choosing to be single or to leave our jobs make the choice almost as foolish (especially in this economic environment). The safety net, if we can even call it that, which exists in the US does not support individual freedom and certainly prevents our independence since we’re dependent on employers for our health insurance rather than interdependent as a society that provides a safety net to all of us. It supports the status quo and punishes those who dare to step outside by pulling the safety net out from under us.

On a personal level, I would like to free myself from societal expectations of living my life a certain way. I want independence from the notion that I have to make a certain amount of money, live a certain way, and participate in the insane idea of growth, in order to be considered successful. I’ve tried that and I don’t feel successful. I define success as living an authentic life, of pursuing what is important to us. Yet, I’ve spent the first 40 years of my life pursuing the success definitions of others. I am working on gaining independence from my need to do that. I do that by choosing to be single (aware of the negative consequences), for example.

So, freedom and independence contain both internal and external elements. Society can enable us to obtain freedom by offering a safety net – something that all of us create to support each other. We can gain independence for ourselves by letting go of normative ideas that force us into certain molds that do not fit us well. Let’s fight for our right to be free!

Six weeks down and two weeks to go with $442 more to raise to meet my goal. Thank you to everybody for your support. Both monetary and verbal support are greatly appreciated. And if you’ve been meaning to help me reach my financial goal, now is a good time to do so . I can see why this combination of physical activity and fundraising is used a lot: It is very motivating to me! Not sure if I wouldn’t have succumb to the excuses today – I am too tired, the hills are too steep… But 1 hour and 35 minutes later, I was glad I walked! Again I was accompanied by another great interview by C.S. Soong of Anne McClintock, a professor at my alma mater UW – Madison: Paranoia, empire, and torture. The interview is based on a recent article by McClintock published in Small Axe, a journal published by Duke University Press.

     Continue reading this post » » »

Two things converge today: The Pride Parades and the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots. As a newly released anthology chronicles, the Stonewall Riots sparked a radical movement for gay liberation. But as Tommi Avicolli Mecca pointed out in a recent interview, the movement quickly morphed into something that was acceptable by mainstream: Instead of fighting for liberation – something that would lay the seeds of a different society – assimilation was promoted. The LGBT movement was born, which now seems to be the same-sex marriage movement, a single issue platform with the goal of normalizing. Husband, wife, 2.5 kids, and white picket fence. Sure that husband and wife are of the same sex is different but that is the only difference. Otherwise the family is normal. As Michael Warner so eloquently decried, any attempts to move away from the dictates of “normal” – a dictate that makes everything else abnormal – have been given up. People who want to live differently are left out. Other ways of living are no longer honored, though some still dare to explore them. At least, that’s what the national scene looks like. Amazingly enough, there’s a pocket in Salt Lake City where “mainstream assimilationists collaborated with radical activists to develop talking points, coordinate strategy and change homophobic policy.” Something that honors the legacy of Stonewall but is also more effectively fighting for the rights of all people, not just those folks who want to get married. As Lisa Duggan points out, the Utah strategy that fights for anti-discrimination protection rather than same-sex marriage is brilliant.

The brilliance of the strategy is its ability to refocus public opinion, put conservative opponents on the defensive, shift public perception of the barriers to LGBT equality and broaden the scope of action to include the needs of people living in nonconjugal households, be they straight, gay or other. [my emphasis]

Furthermore, the broader struggle in Utah – required by a Super DOMA, which not only defines marriage as between one man and one woman but also restricts “marriage like” entities – has brought to the forefront

a simple but often overlooked fact: many basic rights and protections for LGBT citizens, including some on the CGI list [Common Ground Initiative, a platform that fights for a list of rights beyond marriage], are not guaranteed by marriage. Housing and employment discrimination, for example, could continue against married or cohabiting couples as well as single people. That point is very well taken in the current political climate, when marriage equality often stands in for all civil equality.

Getting around the Super DOMA forces activists to look at all relationships, not just marriage-like couples. The end result is that they are fighting for equality for all and really mean all, including the uncoupled.

This also has another beautiful side-effect:

Such proposals begin to make the diversity of households and interdependent relationships visible and highlight the limits of a marriage-focused gay rights agenda that prioritizes the needs of the conventionally coupled.

The work in Utah embraces the spirit of Stonewall and moves it ahead by fighting for all family constellations, including alternative ones. The critique of the exclusive focus on same-sex marriage seems to be getting louder (see also here and here and here). The time is ripe to build coalitions around marriage inequality and follow the Utah model to fight for rights for all people. It is time to call for full civil equality for all and really mean all!

Hat tip and big thank you to Nancy Polikoff for making me aware of Duggan’s great article!

I might regret walking home twice this week – my glutes are already complaining – but the sun was out and I would’ve had to pay exact fare for the bus, so I decided to walk home again today.

After setting my pace with some music, I listened to Terry Gross’ interview with Michelle Goldberg. I heard parts of that interview before and it had fascinated me enough to dig it up. Goldberg describes the history of the fight for women’s reproductive rights.      Continue reading this post » » »

Obama’s campaign was all about change. Presumably his presidency will be about this as well, if his first few days in office are an indication, there certainly will be quite a few things changing, for the better. But is this change fundamental enough? I suspect not. The financial crisis and the specter of climate change are clear reminders that our way of life is not sustainable. There is a limit to growth no matter what economists are trying to make us believe. We need to rethink our fundamental assumptions instead of calling on each other to defend our way of life. We cannot defend our way of life – against what would we defend it anyway? Reality?

Here are some changes we need to reverse our march toward doomsday:

• Build an economy on the notion of enough, rather than more: We need to abandon the idea that more is better because we’re suffocating in the trash.
• Replace the focus on coupling with rebuilding community ties: The nuclear family has choked out other ties that are important for a fulfilling and meaningful life. Instead of putting all of our eggs into the basket of one other person, we need to (re)learn to connect deeply and intimately with many people.
• Create jobs that are life-affirming rather than mind-numbing: Most jobs address small, often rather irrelevant, parts of the big corporate machine. We could harness the intelligence wasted on these jobs to address the problems we need to confront.
• Face the reality that capitalism is undermining democracy: If the most powerful institutions in our society are run as kingdoms, we cannot expect democracy to flourish.
• Stop ignoring the problem of overpopulation: There are too many people on this planet to live comfortably. The current population size is not sustainable – another example where more is not better. Addressing this issue will be painful and extremely difficult ethically. The longer we wait, though, the worse it is going to get.

I am sure there’s much, much more that needs fundamental change. Obama will not bring this about. He can’t really. He is a politician after all. But we can. All of us can start looking – really looking – at our lives and decide what works and what doesn’t, what is sustainable and what isn’t. And then we can start to make changes, slowly but surely. Will it matter? Maybe. However, rather than pondering our impact (or lack thereof), we could simply decide to act as if our actions matter. If enough of us make that decision, things will change.

Obama and his administration can make these changes easier by enacting things like universal health care, mandatory sick leave, and even by targeting the economic stimulus toward project that build sustainability. These are important foundational blocks onto which we can build real change.

Sustainability must be in the air. Here’s a great post from the Regressive Antidote that touches on similar themes that I covered here.