I'm sorry I haven't written on my normal schedule lately, but all the political news and current events just have me feeling depressed. It's just that solutions seem so tantalizingly close or obvious, but no politician is willing to stick their neck out for it. Or maybe it's the fact that we as a country seem to be doing the same things year after year with little change.
We had a worse school shooting on Wednesday than Columbine, which is now shorthand for "school shooting." But if you believe Republican sources, there is nothing we can do about it. We can't have background checks universal and close gun show loopholes. We can't prohibit domestic abusers from having guns. We can't require gun owners to have insurance for their weapon like it was a car. We can't bar gun sales to violent criminals. We can't bar gun sales to convicted stalkers or (if it IS a mental health problem) expand our mental health services in the country. We can't even make bump stocks (like in the Las Vegas shooting) illegal. We can't. We can't. We can't. But other countries have. And it's been successful. But we can't. Canada doesn't have these types of shootings. They have guns. Germany doesn't have these types of shootings. They have guns. The UK and Australia had mass shootings that prompted incredibly strict rules on guns. The UK had 26 gun-related homicides in 2015-2016, the equivalent of 130 if it were the size of the USA. Australia hasn't had a mass shooting since. Take this chart of what Americans support and what experts believe will work. (Also, please peruse this graphic by 538 about gun deaths in America. Nearly 2/3 are suicides, and more than half of all gun deaths are suicides by men. Nearly half are suicides by white men. Fascinating information, and research tells us if there isn't a gun around, the suicide rate would drop dramatically.). We aren't going to do any of them. We can't. We won't.
If you dislike abortions (many pro-choice folks also wish to see their decline), then take a look at both Colorado and the Netherlands. Colorado made birth control widely available to women, especially teenagers. Guess what? The abortion rate dropped, as did the teen pregnancy rate. If you dislike abortion, follow Colorado's lead. The Netherlands has liberal abortion laws, but wide access to public health programs and facilities. Their abortion rate is half that of the United States. Ireland is the same way, but with an even lower abortion rate. Put simply: If you think abortion is an issue that politicians must address, then an investment in access to and costs of health care is a proven solution. But we aren't going to do that. We can't. We won't.
We continue to see Republicans and Democrats tussle over immigration laws, specifically DACA. However, DACA has never been a partisan issue until Donald Trump. Two-thirds of Republicans believe DACA recipients should receive citizenship status. This should be a non-starter. Americans by a nearly 2:1 margin are opposed to Donald Trump's wall on the southern border. There are ways to combat illegal immigration — Barack Obama's administration deported more criminals than any other president before him. However, let's draw a line between violent illegal immigrants and nonviolent illegal immigrants. Syed Jamal, a Kansas chemistry instructor who overstayed a student visa, is not violent. He has been in this country for decades and volunteered in schools. He has, by all accounts, been an active and contributing member of society. Yet he was arrested in front of his children and nearly deported to Bangladesh. If you want to get rid of the "bad hombres," that's one thing. But Jamal has been an angel. We aren't going to focus on the people deserving of deportation. We can't. We won't.
I could keep going with things that have proven solutions yet we stand here stone-faced as though there are no possible solutions. We could fix our country's infrastructure if we wanted to, or actually help Puerto Rico or not be racist to other countries ("S***hole") or give tax cuts to people who need it instead of the rich or address global warming on a national scale or have meaningful conversations about gender, sex and #MeToo. But we aren't going to do that. We can't. We won't.
Maybe some day our country can move past its ugly present and be progressive, be visionary, and be forward-thinking. Maybe that'll happen with Democrats in charge. Maybe they won't get elected. I just know that I'm tired of seeing worse and worse news come out of Washington. It's not just one party or the other.
I want to see politicians debating issues on their merits. I want to see politicians using facts and data to drive their decisions. I want to see politicians actually giving a crap rather than scoring political points without action. I want real, meaningful progress. I want fairness and justice and bipartisanship. I want to believe that the Mueller report will spur the GOP to act, but I don't think so after seeing their push for and reaction to the Nunes memo. I want to believe the Democrats are already pushing for obstruction of justice charges, but instead they're waiting a year and a half for Mueller to issue a report telling them what they already know. I want a president who is more interested in governing than picking fights with perceived enemies. I want an administration that won't drag its feet in denouncing domestic abusers.
But we aren't going to do that. We can't. We won't. And that's why I'm politically depressed.
Using Numbers Correctly and Researching Data
I find myself caught in between two people groups, and I am satisfied by neither's stance. On one hand, my left friends have been passing around the number of "18 school shootings this year." On the other hand, my right friends have been passing around stories detailing that those numbers are inflated.
My right friends are correct in fact: There were not 18 school shootings. Those numbers include a suicide in a high school parking lot at 2 a.m., an accidental shooting from a holstered gun of an officer in a school gym (a third grade student grabbed it), and several other incidents where no one was injured or targeted. Scary yes, but certainly not what anyone would categorize as a "school shooting," a la Columbine, Sandy Hook, Parkland, etc., etc., etc.
But my left friends are correct in function: There are too many school shootings. By even the strictest definition, there have been 3 school shootings this year: At least Italy, Texas, one in Kentucky, and Parkland, Fla., with some wiggle room on others. It's not even two months into the year! That's too many.
My right friends are right on the figure, but are missing the point: How many deaths/school shootings are we willing to accept? The left is strenuously shouting ZERO!, which should be the only correct answer. These problems don't happen in other countries, and by arguing over the details of this figure, it's an effective hand-wave of the problem. In essence, they're saying "It's overblown, so what's the big deal?" It's missing the forest for the trees.
My left friends are wrong on the figure, but right on the point: That's a problem, too. We, the public, need to be able to use common definitions for problems, and use well-supported data. If we're just spouting numbers without knowing what's behind it, that's a lack of critical thinking and a poor basis for governance. The number of 18 school shootings is wrong. The left is not absolved of its sin of poorly backed data just because it gets the big picture view right.
So here I am stuck in the middle, both agreeing with and upset at my left and right friends. (Note: The conversation we need to have about guns is not a racial one. I can point to data that shows that white male suicides are nearly half the gun deaths in America — that's an unaddressed problem! — and also point to data showing that more than twice as many black Americans are killed in homicides than white Americans (same link) — that's an equally unaddressed problem.) I want to use good numbers to back up my assertions. I want to be able to support my arguments. If you're going to go into battle, know what you're fighting for and have the best gear.
My Favorite Kids' Movies
(Editor's Note: I'm including this again because I didn't share the last edition and I really liked this section. I wanted to include it to share my thoughts.)
I recently explained my kids' movies theory to some friends. Specifically, it's why I prefer Moana and Zootopia to most other films. These are practically the only two kids movies with a) female protagonists b) with two supportive and alive parents (though they can and do have flaws) c) they pursue career/societal/personal goals d) that are not about getting a man and/or they don't have a love interest.
That's not to say that I only like movies with female protagonists or that love stories aren't good. It's also not to fall into the trap of saying movies are PROBLEMATIC when they don't meet my version of the Bechdel Test. But there is such a depth and breadth to stories told about men, and stories about women are almost always reduced to "her life isn't complete without a man." Men don't get the same treatment.
Before these two movies, the closest Disney movie you had that fit the bill was Mulan. However, the romantic subplot with Shang seemed to undermine the message that she was an independent woman with the ability to pursue her own goals. Heck, the whole "Montage of Protagonist Discovering Their Focus And Abilities" is set to the song "Be A Man," which also undermines the message a bit. It's the closest Disney had come, but it doesn't quite meet my standard because of Shang.
There has been a little more emphasis in recent years to meet these checks. Finding Dory and Inside Out arguably meet all four, but at least meet three. I haven't seen Brave. Frozen does not pass the test. Tangled doesn't. Even ones from my era, like Pocahontas and The Little Mermaid don't. Going back even further doesn't do Disney/Pixar any more favors. But that's what's so interesting about this list: In the history of Disney films, they might have only 2-4 that meet these simple tests.
Summary Judgments
I thought this was an interesting perspective from a person on the ground in South Korea on the medal ceremonies. • • • Yet another reason why I feel hopeless about our media situation in America. The more you read in that story, the ickier you should feel. • • • This is really amazing, and I have to give credit to the FDA for this: There's a new blood test for concussions! There are two proteins that show up 97 percent of the time with CT-diagnosed concussions. The blood test can identify it within 12 hours. It's one of the first medical tests/medicines approved by the Breakthrough Devices Program, which is kind of a "fast lane" for awesome medicine (passed by Congress in December 2016). • • • Ready Player One looks like crap, though maybe that's just because I hated the book. I have lots of thoughts on that one that I'll share closer to the movie coming out. Black Panther, on the other hand, looks amazing. • • • It's been too cold to run until this week. And I've been under the weather, health-wise. So I couldn't take advantage of it. I did sign up for the Warrior Dash in June and am thinking about the Tough Mudder. • • • The kids have each had their grumpy moments. We think there's been a minor bug going around giving us all stomach aches and general malaise. But Roland's the latest (and last) to get it, so he's been incredibly grumpy lately. This morning, he woke up, went to the bathroom and then came into our room and got in our bed. "Mommy, I'm mad at you!" "Why? You just woke up." "I'm very mad at you!" "You can go back to your room until you're nicer." "BAAAH!" /Goes to his room. Alyson and I just looked at each other like "What just happened?"
I tried to comment on this when you posted the movie criteria before, but my work computer isn't set up for commenting easily and that's usually where I read your posts...
ReplyDeleteMatt and I recently watched Brave. It was cute! And I think you could make an argument that it loosely meets the Nash-Bechdel test: a) female protagonist, Merida b) with two definitely alive parents who are somewhat supportive but kind of exasperated because they mainly just want her to marry someone from one of the other Scottish clans for treaty-purposes, but c/d) Merida is totally uninterested in getting married or meeting any of the potential suitors because she'd rather be really awesome at archery.
But! In my mind, the biggest problem with this movie is that, even if Merida was interested in getting married, she would be interested in literally NONE of these men, because she would probably realize immediately that she could do better. They are almost all portrayed as boorish oafs who just want to fight each other and hunt bears, and have no critical-thinking or any other skills. Maybe that was the point, but also ... why can't she be uninterested in marriage for its own sake, and not because the thought of being bound to one of these losers sounds like the worst? (Because if one of them were cute/kind/had more than rocks for brains, she might have to swoon and fall all over herself to make the movie any good? I'm rolling my eyes so hard they're gonna get stuck.)
Anyway. I feel ya on being depressed about politics. Thanks for doing what you do anyway, I always enjoy reading.
Allie
I need to see Brave. That sounds like it meets my standards. I'm totally OK with "Maybe I'd like to get married someday, but none of you all are worth it so I'm not in a rush." That's subtle and real.
DeleteWith Moana and Zootopia, although there were male secondary leads, they were never presented as romantic in any way. I liked that; it subliminally taught that men and women can see themselves as equals and friends (without one side or another having FEELINGS for the other).