To my daughter on my fiftieth birthday.

Go placidly?  I suppose...assuming you're placid.  Go feistily, loudly; draw the world in wide brush strokes and bold colours.  Let your hair down.  Walk in bare feet.  Make them shush you.  Uh...assuming you're a little like me.

And they will try and shush you.  Shush you, manipulate you, and intimidate you into being just like them or being assessed on their terms.  Walk ye into the wall of 'how things are done around here' and stand there, awaiting our instructions.  Be careful not to lift your head above the others or we might lop it off.  Don't dance or you will fall off the edge.  Above all, don't say anything.

The work of Herbert Kelman suggests there are three types of conformity:

• Compliance is public conformity, while possibly keeping one's own private beliefs.
• Identification is conforming to someone who is liked and respected, such as a celebrity or a favorite uncle.
• Internalization is accepting the belief or behavior and conforming both publicly and privately.

We struggle with conformity as a race, because our earliest conformities force us to take care of ourselves.  Our earliest conformities can save us.  We must be hard-wired to listen and to conform.  If we were not, most of us wouldn't make it to our fifth birthday, let alone our fiftieth.  These behaviours need to be fully internalized, literally for our own good:  Look both ways before you cross the road.  Eat your vegetables.  Get some sleep.  This kind of conformity is good.  Right down to the maxim that there's safety in numbers.

And there are times when compliance is important.  Best not to hurt others, physically or psychologically.  It's probable that one should turn one's phone off at the theatre, or stand in line so that you are served when it's your turn. We need to get along and respect each other's rights and freedoms.  We must try to be fair.

So, it's all good.  Or is it?  Well, no. Sadly, this natural tendency to conform is often used to control, to manipulate, to limit who you are.  And in the next few years, your teenage years, you will experience the most pressures to conform you will ever experience in your life -- not only from society wanting you to behave (what you wear, your career choices, your moral and spiritual choices) but, also, peers wanting you to break out and have a lot of fun and, perhaps, try out a few risky behaviours.

Now, because higher reasoning is a new skill for the teenager, teenagers have trouble teasing out what's right, healthy, sane.  Teenagers sometimes engage in behaviours that they never did before and never will again. And, sadly, some start to limit themselves early.  Into wearing only pink or blue.  Into only being interested in what celebrities do.  Or into believing that they're not capable.  So, how do you know?  How do you know what's right?  And how do you know what's right for you?

Your best bet is to believe in yourself.  Listen to your own internal voice.  And, if what you want does no harm to yourself or others, do it.  It's your life.  Live it to the fullest to avoid regret.  The essense of a lot of folks' regret is over-conforming, listening too much, trying to be too 'good' and not doing the things that move them.

And if you listen to and follow your heart, I guarantee you that at one time or another you will be walking alone.  You will be the only one of your friends who likes stamp collecting or vocaloids or rock climbing, or whatever.  And I can tell you from experience that it's difficult to pause on the path and see that there's no one with you.

However, think about this:  You will, likely, be doing things that others just talk about.  That's kind of neat.  You will, likely, live longer for indulging your own idiosycrancies.  You will, likely, be happier.  Now, that's all good.

And despite being alone from time to time, you will always find folks who like your choices themselves or folks who like your individuality and love you for it.  Best ever.  So, listen to yourself, listen to that wonderful voice that urges you to do what you want, how you want; what you like, what you need, how you like and need it.

Don't let me or anyone define for you what being a woman is.  Hear me, sure.  But listen to yourself.

Look over there!

Well, a few months ago, folks down there in the US were talking about things.  They were talking about the environment, about the economy, about health care.  They were talking about education and other social necessities.  In such a trying time, such things do need to be discussed.  Super.  But what are they talking about now?

Well, now, they're talking about abortion, access to birth control, and rolling back women's rights.  These are hot button issues.  People either feel one way or t'other on reproductive choice and they feel very strongly about it.  They will fight.  They will get involved.  Heck, it's not even my country and I feel involved.

I swear it's almost like it's being done on purpose.  Don't look at the mess the environment's in or your unneccessary reliance on fossil fuels.  Don't look at the economy.  Look over there!  See?

I know I'm being cynical and I know it's not a big conspiracy.  But it's so convenient.  And it draws voter attention away from issues like whether corporations should be considered people, and whether taxation is fair, and whether climate change is an issue that needs addressing.

Everybody's in on it, too.  Heck, if I lived there I would be in on it in a big way.  As laws start passing that limit a woman's right to choose (women of childbearing age have no rights) or make her right to choose uncomfortable or more difficult, folks who believe in women's reproductive rights are fighting.  They have to.  It's a drop-everything-and-fight situtation.  It can't be ignored.  And, because we know that society is deeply divided on these issues, a lot of folks will wade into the fray.  A lot of folks will be focused only on this issue.

But no one will address big oil.  Or the deficiencies in the education system.  Or climate issues.  Or bailouts.  Or how to avoid the financial meltdown in the future.  Or....

That's because we're all too busy looking over there.

What's good for the goose...

Down there in the USA, state government after state government is starting to pass laws making it uncomfortable or downright illegal to have an abortion.  I even heard a rumour that one State government will make it legal to kill abortion doctors.  And the GOP, that grand old party, is making real noise about reducing or removing reproductive rights from women.  Even a woman's access to birth control may be at risk.

So it's looks to me like the Republicans want to have zillions of little Republicans dashing about - to mold and shape - to grow into a grand army for the Republic.... Sorry, no, sorry.  That's Star Wars.  But they definitely do seem to want lots of little ones popping out.

So, I was thinking.  We shouldn't stop with reducing or negating women's reproductive rights.  We should include the men as well, right?  So.  How about a few new laws?  Because every sperm is sacred.

1)  Vasectomies are prohibited.
2)  Condoms are prohibited.
3)  Outercourse or withdrawal is prohibited.
4)  Abstinence is prohibited.

However, the Rhythm Method is allowed.

There.  Now that's good isn't it?  We're all in it together.

Hanging on the edge. At left of centre.

Okay, I have opinions.  And I express them pretty clearly.  Very clearly.  Okay, darn baldly.  But it's funny how often it's assumed a publicly expressed opinion is extreme.  That if one is motivated enough to blog about something or even post it on facebook, then the ideas expressed must be extreme, by definition, somehow.  Sigh.  It's that binary thinking again - you must fit into the world view that people's strongly held opinions are either way over here or way over there.

Actually, though I am sure I can still surprise because of my libertarian leanings and can from time to time be a little extreme, mostly I waffle about a little left of centre.  I am one of those mambypambies in the middle.  Proud to be there.

It's funny, though, how the slightest lean to the left can often illicit an extreme response from folks who don't agree.  Actually, the slightest lean anywhere tends to illicit an extreme response from someone.  Often with vituperative or aggressive or dismissive language and link after link after link (many of which were never read by the sender, it seems).  I read all these links, by the way.  I am really trying to earn my nambypamby gold star.

So, it dawned on me today -- I was listening to a podcast discussing a flame war -- that one is marked by the company that disagrees with one more than by one's expressed opinion, intention, word, or deed.  Nice.

Okay, so I'm a crank.

And you know what?  Fine.  Proud to be one.  And I am going out on a limb here.  Way out.   But I really don't mind too much.  I hazard a guess there are lot of folks with me but because I am The Crank, they're letting me go at it.

So that's my opinion for today.  I am sure I can link to some website or other that supports this opinion. Or two.  Or three.

How long, would you say?

We, in Canada, often follow the States in trend on debate issues.  We don't make the same choices but we often find ourselves embroiled in similar debates after or as issues are being batted about south of us.  No matter what you do, the loudest and the biggest tends to dictate the culture in the classroom.  And we happen to have the seat next to the loudest and the biggest.

This tendency is being exacerbated by our current Conservative government that believes it has a mandate to change our very way of life in this country.  Our Conservative leaders seem to be dutifully following the leaders of the United States as they attempt to control their constituent populations while at the same time denying that population its voice, rights, and freedoms.

Well, now, down there, they are having debates over women's reproductive rights -- and it looks like the debate has devolved to removing women's rights period.  One female senator is suggesting that women need not have the right to vote.  Nice.

Where is the backlash coming from?  What fear?  Is it to take our minds off of the rich and their bailouts?  Or take our attention away from bill after bill that attempts to limit rights and freedoms?  Or would folks really strip over half the population of its rights to spite Obama?  No idea.  None, really.  I am pretty sure that even the people spouting these opinions and restrictions may not fully believe them.  That it's all political.  Who really wants extremists to be in charge of anyone's health care.

Because here is what I believe:  No one in their right mind would limit freedom of speech, unless they were frightened that they could not support their own position.  No one in their right mind would deny a woman providence over her body unless her power is intimidating.  No one in their right mind would rescind Habeas Corpus unless they need to operate in secrecy.  No one in their right mind would limit my ability and access to information if information weren't powerful.  The privileged put up fences when they are frightened, when they know the world is not fair but want to keep what is theirs, whether they deserve it or not.

I am pretty sure this debate is being kindled here in this country and we will soon have to argue women's reproductive rights again.  Just as bills limiting information sharing and increasing the government's access to private information are being tabled -- just like they were down there in the States.  I say bring it on.  In this day and age, are you really going to expect me to sit down and do what you tell me to do because you believe in some god or other? Or want to preserve the privilege of the rich?  Do you really think that I am so addicted to computer games that I'm not listening?  Really?  I think I'll be able to put them down.

Why, look.  I already did.

Subversive Kitchen? Or Convenient?

Years ago, I thought I would take aim at rampant consumerism in my home by investing some thought, time, and effort into running an efficient kitchen.  I would learn how to cook well and stop eating crap out just because it was easy.  I would make menus and lists and waste less food.  I would host dinner parties as opposed to eat out.  It`s been working.  Really working.  Fun, even,except for the dishes.  But even that`s not so bad.

Now, as some of you know, we have been struggling financially the last couple of years; so, funnily enough, these initiatives that started out as quiet ways to reduce the grip of consumerism on our household actually saved our bacon, if you`ll pardon the pun, (along with the generosity of a very close friend without whom we most certainly would be lost).  But it was satisfying to see that we could struggle along, maintain our core values and objectives, and make it through despite trying circumstances.

So, I am looking forward to the next year as things turn around financially.  I am pretty sure that we will maintain our modest ways and see the real impact of what we set out to do.  And, with that extra money, we can do other things like insulate the house better, install solar panels, or a quiet wind turbine, or both.  Seems ironic that we need money to save money.  But it was ever thus.

Unless, of course, we cave.  I am not sure if we can take credit for what we've done because it was maintained out of neccesity and the austerity has been trying.  I am immature enough to have wanted better rewards along the way.  I don't half like my gold stars.  And it's super difficult to walk through the world and constantly say 'no' to yourself, trebly so your daughter, when everything is advertised everywhere and everything looks so good.  Impulse control is a lot easier when you simply don't have the money. So, I am interested to see if, as things ease, we can keep our heads clear and listen to our hearts as opposed to the gonads as it were

As I write this I am contemplating the menu for the next couple of days, even though my husband and daughter and I could afford a night out.  I think I'll quash that impulse and, in my Subversive Kitchen, feed the soul not the Beast.

Let's all send Mr. Ford a cup of coffee.

I'm a big girl.

Well, actualy I'm not.  I can be as petulant, arrogant, and blind as the next person,  perhaps even more so because of my turbulent nature.  But I can, now that I've been in this body for a few (okay a lot of) decades, see the symptoms of full blown denial and can back down until I get my reason back on.  In those moments, if I can embrance what's really in front of me, if I can hear what the statistics are saying, sometimes I can change my mind.  It is rare for folks to change their minds and irrationally held beliefs are the most difficult to shake.

And, if you've been following Mr. Rob Ford's odyssey with the TTC, you've seen a prime example of a guy who isn't looking at the facts, justing doing what he believes is right.  And, as schmarmy and lowbrow as he is, he should be lauded for doing what he believes is right.  I will defnitely grant him that.   However, when we start to mix in some of the facts, his position looks myopic at best.  He's digging in his heels on the transit issue (perhaps because he's faltered on so many others) and, again, perhaps laudably, he's doing this for the most noble of reasons.  I just wish he could support his position.

For those of you who might be new to this conflict in the fair city of Toronto:  Rob Ford, the city's Mayor, is currently fighting for his vision of mass transit.  This includes cancelling the proposed Transit City program, a comprehensive transit plan that would service 175 million riders a year, of which there would be a projected 75 million new riders, in favour of the Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown Line, a subway that would run along Eglinton from Black Creek in the west to Kennedy Station in the east, a significant reduction in overall service.  Both plans would cost about the same amount - somewhere around 8-9 billion dollars.  Ford insists that transit routes do not belong on roads because they  contribute to congestion and make the city less livable.  Proponents of Transit City believe that all that new ridership would take vehicles off the road and reduce congestion not only on Eglinton but on twenty other extremely busy routes in the city, making the city more livable. 

Ford says he was originally voted in on a subway-subway-subway platform.  Actually, he was voted in on overall budget issues, the promise that he would cut spending without cutting service.  The TTC was also an issue on his platform but I think people only heard the following message during Ford's campaign:  That Toronto was grossly overspending and that if it were run more like a business with business folk at the helm, there would be a lot of money saved without sacrificing services.

But it looks very much like Mr. Ford didn't know what he was talking about where the city budget is concerned.  He was only expressing a heatfelt opinion.   Once the city budget was analysed, it became clear that, in order for the city to meet Rob Ford\s bottom line, services would have to be cut.  This was exacerbated by Mr. Ford pushing through a tax reduction for folks driving cars.  Instead, it made sense to reduce children's access to city pools and libraries.  Because sixty bucks a year to a person who drives a car is a pittance and access to knowledge and fun is paramount for children, I am having trouble embracing this logic.  And we must remember that Ford's basic premise, that the same services could be provided for less, was deeply faulty on analysis.

But he kept on going.  Oh boy, for sure.  Best not change your opinion just because a few facts get in the way.  He had to reduce the budget at any price.  And he did.  Services are being cut across the board.

So, now Ford is pushing his vision for mass transit.  If he's able to force this through, his crosstown line will service only a fraction of the original proposal and rapid transit services will take, probably, fifty or sixty years to reach parts of the city that desperately need them right now.  Doug Ford, Rob's brother, has even gone so far as to say that the TTC needs an overhaul, that it needs a businessman to run it.  He actually said that the TTC needs an 'enema'.  Because he's really a class act. 

But doesn't this refrain sound familiar? Rob Ford is, again, saying that as a business person he knows best and that the TTC is, obviously, poorly run because there is little mind to the bottom line.  The standard neoliberal refrain.

Okay, actually, the TTC is one of the least, if not the least, subsidized transit system in all of North America.  The least. (The fact that it is the least subsidized transit service is a crime but let's talk about that another day.) I am not sure what bottom line the Ford brothers have in mind for the TTC but if they want to reduce costs, then they will have to cut service.  Oh wait!  That's what they're already doing as part of the city budget overhaul.  Excellent.  If they want to overhaul the TTC, then, they will, likely cut services even more.  Cheers.

I am really feeling that on this issue it is not the TTC that needs an enema.

So, on that note, I would invite all of you to go down to your closest Timmies, buy Mr. Ford a coffee, and take it down there to the city hall.  If Ford drinks enough coffee, I hear tell that the caffiene might get the body going enough to allow him to clear up any constipation of...thought.  It might not change his mind -- like I say, it is rare for a person to change their mind on deeply held beliefs and irrationally held beliefs are the hardest to shake -- but, at the very least, it might help him lose a few pounds.