Political Cartoon of the Day

Cartoon by Lee Judge of the Kansas City Star

This is from November, but thought it made way too much sense to pass up.

Enjoy!

Brave 9-year old girl

Recently, a school in the United Kingdom was conducting a class on bullying. After a week of lessons, the teacher was surprised to find out that, "almost every student in his class thought that people who were gay or lesbian were 'bad or wrong in some way'; additionally, most said they'd heard the word 'gay' used as an insult."

The teacher decided to share his secret with the class - he is gay. The response of one of his students was priceless and invaluable.

This young lady has learned a valuable lesson that many adults have missed. A person's sexuality does not make him or her a "bad person". Similarly, using the word "gay" as an insult to anyone is in essence passing judgement on anyone who is gay. 

She is definitely a brave young lady.

Here is the full article:  9-year-old girl writes sweetest letter to gay teacher.

How do you define racism?

Today the hosts of The View had a very interesting discussion on what racism is or is not.

Here is the clip from the show:

So, what do you think?

Does racism have to be overt and life threatening?

Or are the day-to-day discrimination and inequality racism?

Cartoon by Gary Varvel, Indianapolis Star

Its not about a death - its about continued injustice

In the last few months I hear my friends asking why there is a need to protest the deaths of criminals. You guessed it, these conversations usually revolved around the protests in Ferguson, MO, New York City, Columbus, OH, and Cleveland, OH. Yes, again, these friends are white.

The Washington Post had a great article last week: The Many Faces of Rage. There are some key points I'd like to pull out of it. No, they will probably not change my friend's minds, but it may help others understand what is happening here.

First, an important point ..... these protests are not about 1 death. The deaths that are tied to the protests are just straws .... straws that have broken on the camel's back. They are the boiling point. 

Within the article, there was a video that I'd like to share with you. Please watch and then share your insight, opinions, or point of view.

If for some reason the video does not come up on its own, please use this link:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv/national/brotherspeak-exploring-rage-after-ferguson/2014/12/12/1338d1ac-8223-11e4-b936-f3afab0155a7_video.html

Marriage - what do we really want?

I was reading a story for the Washington Post recently on marriage; What men (and women) want in a marriage, today vs. yesterday. It was a good read, but it got me thinking ....

1977 - 1/2 of women and just under 1/2 of men polled said that they would like to have a marriage where the husband and wife both have jobs, both do housework, and both take care of the children.

2011 - 3/4 of women and about 2/3 of men polled said that they would like to have a marriage where the husband provides for the family and the wife takes care of the house and children.

Interesting, isn't it? How many women do you meet that complain their husband or significant other do not help around the house. Come to find out, that although many women complain abundantly about the issue ... 3/4 of the women say they want that type of marriage.

The article noted that the results of the poll where basically the same no matter the age or the income level of the household.

A question that I have, that the article didn't answer, is in regards to society. Does the overwhelming societal pressures inhibit women from expressing their true desires? In other words, if 3/4 of the women polled said they would prefer to be stay-at-home moms and the husbands would be out taking in the working environment - does society's view of stay-at-home moms sway women from admitting this desire?

What are your thoughts?

The only thing controversial are the readers

I came across this picture with the headline - "Controversial Photo Shows Him Just Being a Dad".

I looked at the picture for quite a while trying to figure out what the controversial part was. No clue what the issue was ....  I still had to read the article to get their point.

Do you see the controversial part?

Nope, its not the toe nail polishing ---- which I thought was very sweet.

Did you figure it out? The issue is him playing a video game instead of interacting with the girls. Seriously, that's the "bad" thing he is doing.

I thought that was pretty judgmental; we have no idea what he was doing just before this picture was taken or just after. Maybe he was helping the snuggly daughter get to the next level or naybe the little snuggler just climbed on the couch and he's finishing up the game.

At any rate .... In my opinion ----- GREAT JOB DAD!

This is a great story from USAToday.com!

Most of us spend our lives avoiding a ride in a squad car, but not 73-year-old Dorothy Shepard. She actually enjoys the time she spends in Officer John Holder's car.

Shepard, a widow who lives alone, is recovering from recent knee and back surgeries. Six months ago, Holder stopped by her home for a routine wellness check. The two instantly hit it off.

"She just struck me as someone who really needed someone to care and help her out," explains Holder.

For the past six months, Holder has been ferrying her to and from nearly every doctor's appointment. Not one to seek attention, he didn't tell his superiors what he was doing.

Then something happened to change that. Watch the video above to see the photo of this duo that went viral.

As for Shepard? She says she is just thankful it was officer Holder that knocked on her door those six months ago.

"I know police officers, but I never expected him to be that kind ... he's just tremendous," she says.

Here at the USA TODAY network, not only do we want to provide you with the current events of the day, but also a little dose of inspiration while you're getting your news fix. Inspiration Nation is our way of providing you with that jolt of good news to bring a smile to your day.

Grand Jury and Conflict of Interest

Within the last 30 days we have seen 2 cases taken before a grand jury involving charges against police in the death of unarmed black civilians. In both of these states, Missouri and New York, the grand jury is sometimes, but not always, used to bring indictments against a person(s) the district attorney believes should be charged with a crime.

In the grand jury process, the prosecutor brings in all the evidence that a person(s) has committed a crime. The prosecutor presents this evidence to the grand jury.  As the information in FindLaw.com states:

Grand Jury ProceedingsGrand jury proceedings are much more relaxed than normal court room proceedings. There is no judge present and frequently there are no lawyers except for the prosecutor. The prosecutor will explain the law to the jury and work with them to gather evidence and hear testimony. Under normal courtroom rules of evidence, exhibits and other testimony must adhere to strict rules before admission. However, a grand jury has broad power to see and hear almost anything they would like.
However, unlike the vast majority of trials, grand jury proceedings are kept in strict confidence. This serves two purposes:

1. It encourages witnesses to speak freely and without fear of retaliation.

1. It protects the potential defendant's reputation in case the jury does not decide to indict. 

- See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/how-does-a-grand-jury-work.html#sthash.8fmexI6o.dpuf

There is no judge (the person who should be the most neutral) and no defense attorney. The only person of legal authority at the grand jury meeting is the prosecutor and the intention is that he or she reflects the opinion of the state - that he or she has enough evidence to bring charges against a person(s).  

This is where we see the conflict of interest in both the case in Missouri and in New York. The prosecutor in both of these states is voted into office. The prosecutor also needs the help of the police to find evidence against those he or she would like to charge. In both of these cases it was the local prosecutor who brought the cases in front of the grand jury. The political ramifications of acquiring a charge may be the end of his or her career.

What should have happened instead? In both of these states, the prosecutor has the authority to not call a grand jury and take the case to a preliminary hearing, which is in front of a judge and open to the public. If the prosecutor still wanted to have a grand jury, a special prosecutor, not affiliated or affected by political matters within the jurisdiction, should have been appointed.

Without either of these two changes, these cases and decisions will never positively affect the conversation on race and equity in our justice system.

As promised in November ---- here is Part 2 ...

Privilege – Part 2

December 1, 2014 in Exploring Diversity, Locations, News & Views, Oshkosh

BY JANINE WRIGHT

Last month we looked at the word, “privilege”. Like many words in our American English language, the word has taken on a meaning of its own. Privilege is the “thing” that often separates us whether it is abilities, gender, income, education, race, sexual orientation, or any other form of separateness. Privilege is the way that power is distributed, often without saying a word.

I ended the column last month with a challenge to readers: look at systems you are involved in at home, work, and community to determine where and how privilege is held. It is often one of the hardest questions to grapple when we talk about diversity.

In order to look at the full meaning of privilege, when used in the context of social justice, one must put away assumptions, fears, and prejudices about another thought, lifestyle, or outcome. Privilege is one of those issues that you will not see unless you look at systems head-on. It is not an issue that you can decide you will “never do” or “never enter into” or “once conquered always conquered”; more than likely, you enter the realm of privilege at least once every day. Privilege isn’t typically something we decide to do; rather, it is something we have learned to do. Learning the social norms attached to privilege does not typically come from direct learning; rather through indirect learning in traditions, habits, and unwritten social rules that are modeled for us in the media, in our community, in our family, and in our social and governmental systems. The paradox of privilege is that within the same day an individual can experience privilege and also be denied privilege. For this reason, privilege is hard to acknowledge because acknowledging privilege often makes an individual feel vulnerable, exposed, and unsafe.

Can you feel the question begging to be asked? If privilege is not easily seen, not directly learned, and often perpetuated without knowledge, what can we do to combat it? Acknowledgement, learning to talk about the uncomfortableness of change, and stopping your individual participation in privilege are three key steps to combatting privilege.

Acknowledgement: Like all good self-help books and programs, the first step to change is to acknowledge that there is a problem. In order for individuals to see privilege, they have to admit that there is privilege; thus my challenge to you last month. Keep in mind, just as there are many forms of privilege there are many ways to combat privilege, but all of the solutions have a commonality – they start with you.

One of the emotions that will often come up with acknowledgement is guilt. While this is understandable and a natural part of the acknowledgement process, it serves no good purpose except to motivate you to change. Don’t wallow in the guilt of what your actions (both known and unknown) may or may not have caused. Rather, use it as a way to change your behavior and in turn change your social circle.

Being Comfortable Being Uncomfortable: Acknowledging that you enjoy privileges for something you have not earned creates an uncomfortable feeling within your being. That feeling is called dissonance, which means a conflict of opinions or actions or characters. When dealing with privilege there will be many external sources that will dissuade you from acknowledgement and correction. These sources may be family, friends, co-workers, the media, or the entire social circle you are involved in. The greater the privilege, the greater the dissonance tends to be.

One of the ways to deal with the dissonance is to get involved in groups where you are able to talk about this new awareness and the uncomfortableness you may be feeling, in essence becoming comfortable with being uncomfortable. Oshkosh has at least two resources that can help you with the dissonance. Fit Oshkosh is a grass roots organization that teaches racial literacy. In learning how to talk about race in meaningful and accurate terms (without stereotypes and privilege aspects) you will be better equipped to deal with the dissonance. To get involved in one of Fit Oshkosh’s classes or to get more information on racial literacy, please contact Tracey Robertson at traceyrobertson@att.net. On Common Ground is a group that meets monthly to discuss many different diversity issues. The focus is to provide a safe place to learn how to adequately discuss topics that may often create dissonance. A few of the past topics discussed have been LGBTQ, Native-American culture, Muslim culture, poverty, stereotypes, and religious differences. For more information on meeting dates, times, and venues, please send me an e-mail at wrightjanine@ymail.com

Stop Participating: We stop participating in privilege by recognizing which seemingly acceptable behaviors and common habits within our social group is perpetuating privilege and ending those behaviors and habits. It does not happen overnight and may gradually take place over several years; however, the important aspect is to stop your participation. There are some privilege aspects that you may not have any control over; in those instances it is your obligation to bring the privilege to light. This is when being comfortable with uncomfortableness is very important. Until individuals are comfortable talking about privilege a never-ending cycle tends to happen – the individual acknowledges the behavior or habit of privilege, the individual feels dissonance when stopping the behavior or holding others accountable, in turn the individual feels guilt, feels unsafe, and feels alone, causing the individual fall in line with the social norm, and the cycle continues. Speaking up, while causing great dissonance at the moment, is stopping the cycle and will eventually create more harmony within your being.
So, what do you say? Are you strong enough to deal with privilege in your social circles? Are you willing to deal with the dissonance that comes with acknowledging and stopping privilege? Are you willing to be an advocate for others?

Then get involved. Be in the discussion. Contact either Tracey Robertson at Fit Oshkosh or myself at On Common Ground to get more information on how to get involved.

Janine Wright is an Oshkosh community member who believes diversity makes a community stronger. She facilitates a discussion group, On Common Ground, aimed at providing a safe space for difficult conversations. The group meets at various locations in Oshkosh on the third Saturday of each month. For more information, please send an e-mail to wrightjanine@ymail.com

Privilege.

That is a loaded word. Like many powerful words in the English language, we have come to bastardize its meaning so that it the power of oppressiveness continues to grow.  My article in the November Oshkosh Scene talked about the real meaning of Privilege. Let me know what you think after reading the article ....

Privilege – Real or Imaginary?

November 1, 2014 in Exploring Diversity, Locations, News & Views, Oshkosh

BY JANINE WRIGHT

English is a hard language to learn and understand; many words have multiple meanings. Privilege is one of those words. Sometimes it means an honor, such as, “It is a privilege to meet you.” Other times it means having common rights, such as, “It is a privilege to be an American.” Yet, neither of those meanings covers the true meaning of the word, “A right or benefit that is given to some people and not to others.”

It is this last definition of privilege that makes discussing privilege so difficult. People find it hard to believe that they have a privilege is denied someone else or that his or her life is easier than someone else’s. The definition of privilege makes no judgement. It does not say that one group takes privilege over another group. Rather, this definition points to a system that sometimes, often unintentionally, covers people inequitably.

Since privilege is a difficult topic to cover, checklists have been developed as a way to get people to think past their individual life experiences and see the lives of others within systems. When reading the checklist, it is important to remember to not think of the questions as individualistic; rather, to see them as systemic.

As of late, the discussion of privilege in social justice circles has been centered on White privilege. Therein, lies my question …. Is privilege real or imaginary? The answer seems to be – it depends on which type of privilege we are talking about.

Historically speaking, we can see male privilege at the beginning of our country during the election of our first president. In order to vote, one had to be a white, male landowner – only 6% of the citizens fell into this category. A few people had the right to determine what was or was not good for the entire society; this was the start of male privilege.

Recently, I read the book, Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead, by Sheryl Sandberg, Chief Operating Officer of Facebook. Throughout the entire book, Sandberg, without actually using the words, details male privilege at every level of her career. Even though laws have changed, systems have become more advanced, and few people believe that women are subservient to men, male privilege can still be seen in our current social and business cultures.

A few questions from the male privilege checklist are (reminder “I” in these statements are males):

1. I am far less likely to face sexual harassment at work than my female co-workers are.
2. If I have children and a career, no one will think I’m selfish for not staying at home.3. Even if I sleep with a lot of women, there is no chance that I will be seriously labeled a “slut,” nor is there any male counterpart to “slut-bashing.”

You may remember the 2011 protests, Occupy Wall Street, which started on Wall Street and spread throughout the country. These protests centered on income inequality. The slogan, “We are the 99%” was birthed out of this movement.

The movement was also a commentary on privilege – class privilege. Class privilege is defined as some groups benefiting from unearned, unacknowledged advantage that increases a social group’s power relative to that of others. Similar to male privilege, this privilege was put into our system at the beginning of this country. The people in general – those who were homeless, who rented, who were employed, and those who were unemployed – did not elect the first U.S. President. No, landowners – meaning that they had a means of buying land – elected him.

A few questions from the Social Class Privilege Checklist are (reminder “I” in these statements are people from the higher social class):

1. Law enforcement officials will likely assume I am a non-threatening person once they see me and hear me.
2. I deserve my status because of my accomplishments.3. I can easily speak to my child’s teachers.

This brings us to the most difficult privilege discussion, White privilege. It seems that most people can agree on the first two descriptions of privilege, but when it comes to race privilege many people cringe. It is believed that the fear of admittance to White privilege is a hold over from deep-rooted discrimination during the first 175 years of our national history. Like the other two descriptions of privilege, White privilege was evident at the first election of the U.S. president; only white, male landowners were allowed to vote. Also, like the other two privilege categories, most racial discrimination is illegal yet it is still seen throughout our social and legal systems.

A few questions from the White Privilege Checklist are (reminder, the “I” in these statements are White people):

1. When I am told about our national heritage or about “civilization,” I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.
2. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.3. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race.

The original question was, Privilege – Real or Imaginary? What do you think? Is privilege (in any way) real? Is one form of privilege more real than another? I’d like to hear your thoughts, e-mail me at wrightjanine@ymail.com.

I also challenge each of you reading this, to look at the three checklists referenced and dissect the systems you live and work within. Do you see privilege? Come back next month to find out how we, as a community, can fight privilege and become a more equal and powerful society.

Janine Wright is an Oshkosh community member who believes diversity makes a community stronger. She facilitates On Common Ground, a monthly diversity discussion and educational group at various locations in Oshkosh. For more information about On Common Ground, please contact Janine at wrightjanine@ymail.com.