Emotional Labor: Power and Energy

There's been a lot of discussion in regards to emotional labor lately. I figured I would put in my two cents.

Emotional labor is a situation in which one person is regularly aware of and responsible for dealing with the mood and behavior patterns of another person. Now, in most cases, this ends up simply being aware of whether somebody is in a bad mood and probably needs to talk.

This is what happens when you have a relationship and the (usually) woman ends up dealing with most of the emotional burden in terms of communication. And more extreme situations this is a major confluence of both societal pressures and intersectionality.

Let me explain. Women tend to bear the burden of emotional labor. This is not because men are not capable of doing so. This is because women are socialized to this behavior. However, I believe that it is less likely that it was decided somehow that it is a woman's job to deal with emotions and more that it is a result of the power differential between women and men.

Extreme cases emotional labor is a is a form of hyper-vigilance. Hyper-vigilance is one of the most common results or symptoms of abusive situations. This isn't to say extremely abusive situations. Any abusive situation will result in hyper-vigilance. Things such as bullying, harassment at the workplace, any kind of hostile power differential situation will result in hyper-vigilance.

Hyper-vigilance in this case is when a person becomes focused on and extremely aware of another person's micro-expressions, body language, mood changes, behavior patterns, etc.

In the vast majority of the population, you have white hetero, cis-gendered people. Roughly half of this group has a significant historical and societal power differential over the other half; that is, men have had social power over women. Because of this, women in general are a huge, often suppressed or abused group. The level of suppression or abuse is, of course, widely variable.

It would make a lot of sense that the general power over women creates a general feel of being abused within women, which would lead to a general hyper-vigilance among women towards men. This is a really long way of saying women bear the burden of emotional work because of our minority status. We are trained by our historic suppression, oppression and abuse.

This is observable in other groups with major power differentials. You see it in LGBTQ+ when encountering heterosexual or unknown identifying people, and there is a period of feeling them out before they feel comfortable revealing any clues about their sexuality. Essentially they become hyper-vigilant unless and until the person that they have encountered shows themselves to be safe.

You also see this in terms of racial groups. Many people of color have tried to explain that they become extremely vigilant, extremely aware of the underlying moods and energy, when they're in white spaces.

In many ways, we see the same thing in terms of religious groups as well. Pagans and other minority religions are far less likely to discuss their religion, their religious practices, etc. in a public space and in front of Christians who have not shown themselves to be safe.

Christians on the other hand literally feel comfortable throwing religious language around to the point where, if somebody calls them on it, they consider that to be an attack on them. I can't tell you how often I've been told that someone will pray for me or that they hope that God blesses me etc. in a non-religious situation simply because the Christian and question was comfortable expressing their religion. In fact, they're so comfortable discussing their religion, they go  door-to-door to actually do just that.

In a lot of ways. this explains why so many of these conversations about discrimination, prejudice, and other abuses are so difficult. One group tends to be so hyper-vigilant that they tend to immerse themselves in the situation. The other group never actually even has to think about it.

The major issue doesn't arise, however, until the group that doesn't have to think about it reacts with the topic even just being mentioned with denial, defensiveness, or "counter attacks." They become so blind to their own social power that they consider anything but superiority to be an attack.

What does this all mean for Pagans?

If you find yourself in a situation where you are the majority group, take a moment to evaluate the emotions and energy around you. What is it like? Can you feel the tensions around certain people? In relation to certain people?

Are you supporting minority groups when they have to do the extremely uncomfortable work of calling people on things or are you one of the defenders of the majority? Why have you aligned yourself with the group you are supporting?

Remember, we wouldn't attack a rabbit for being afraid of wolves. We wouldn't say, "but I'm a good wolf, not like the others." We wouldn't "#NotAllWolves". We acknowledge that there is a reason the rabbit is afraid. If we want the rabbit and the wolf to be friends, we support the rabbit in taking smalls steps of trust. We don't shout down the rabbit for being "racist" towards wolves. And we don't hold the rabbit responsible for the wolf's feelings.

So why do we do that for people?

Orlog, Judgment and Discrimination

I like to say that I am non-judgmental, but that isn't exactly true. I was recently told that it feels like I am judging every word that people say. And that is accurate, but misleading.

I am an air sign, very solidly so. As such, one of the things I do is analyze everything. So, yes, every word people say, every action that they do... all of it goes through my metrics, my algorithm of behavior.

And, yes, I very much judge people on that, but perhaps not the way you'd think. Good/bad judgments are reserved for extremes and overall assessments, if at all, and those are pretty liberal in nature. I will determine things like the person's self-identity, sexual orientation, gender identity, hobbies, likes and dislikes, etc.

Each one of those things puts that person into a category based on that. Not categories for how much I value them as a person, but categories to determine if they would like certain topics of discussion, potential hot-button issues, and how I should address them (particularly important in the case of self- and gender identities).

But while those things change how I interact with that person, none of them change how I value that person AS a person.

There are some topics that either directly or indirectly do change my valuation of the person. Sex (not identity or orientation) is one. A person likes sex - good for them. A person cheats on their partner - red flags. A person has lots or little money - no good/bad assessment at all. A person steals money or things, or cheats on their taxes, etc. - evaluation time. A person doesn't want kids - valid choice. A person has kids and refuses to take emotional, physical or financial responsibility for them - mayor of schmuck-ville.

In case you didn't see the pattern, here it is in a nutshell. People can make their own choices about their lives and how they live it. It may not be the choice I have made/would make, but it is theirs to make. It may change the way I talk to them about certain topics, but that's more situational awareness then judgment.

However, if the person ACTS in a way that can or could hurt or harm others, judgment is made. Plain and simple. And the judgment itself is simple, too. This person will hurt others. If they will hurt others, they have lost value or respect in my eyes. They are not as good of a person now.

Ok, so what does this have to do with Orlog?

Well, Orlog is a person's reputation. It comes from their own behavior and, to a lesser extent, their words. It can come from what people say about them, though that has less impact than direct experience. It can also come from the actions of their friends and family. A person you know nothing else about can, and will, be judged by "that's Robert's boy" or "he hangs with Joe the Stoner". You can overcome the Orlog of friends and family pretty easily, but it is still there.

So every time someone interacts with me, their Orlog is subtly adjusting, moving along one or more axis as the information comes in.

Do I judge people? Of course, I do. I can tell you which of my friends I will lend money to, and which have lost that privilege. I can tell you who in my blood family will get more than a bare acknowledgment, and who is only family because of the blood ties to myself and others. We all judge people. It's how we know who we can trust and with what.

That is your Orlog and your Honor. Don't taint it.

Hidden Trauma: Dealing with Crap You Didn't Even Know Bothered You

It started with a post about someone having to sit next to a wriggly, rambunctious child at the movies. Before I knew it, I was on the attack and when it was over, I started crying... for an hour.

WTF?!?

I ended up talking with my husband, and I realized that I was especially sensitive about the idea that parents shouldn't take their kids out in public unless XYZ (usually to do with the behavior of said kids).

Now, to be clear, I get as annoyed as anyone when some little jerk-monster is being a pain. But I also remember feeling completely abandoned by all friends and most family for almost FOUR YEARS.

When I got pregnant, I stopped going to the bars with friends. Seems obvious, right? Well, none of them ever came to visit me or call to check up. I'd already established myself as someone who really doesn't like to "bug people", so I'm very unlikely to call someone just cuz I'm lonely.

Then I moved to eliminate the hour-long commute to work. On several occasions after my son was born, it hit me that if I was somehow incapacitated by
illness or injury, not a single person would notice for days at a time, except my coworkers, and I'd just get fired as a no-show.

My son is ASD (autism spectrum), and he was a fussy, fussy baby. I couldn't go out in the evenings, because he cried for around 2 hours every single night. No reason. Just cried. I couldn't do any of the evening activities that might have gotten me out of the house and around other people.

He also cried in the checkout lane. He'd be perfectly happy shopping, but no matter the time or how long we'd been at the store, he'd cry in the checkout lane. Three times I was told to abandon my month's worth of groceries if I couldn't keep my infant from fussing. As a single working mom, that wasn't even an option, but it didn't keep people from telling me I didn't belong in a public place with a baby.

When my parents came to town, they often took me out to eat. As a single parent breastfeeding, I spent my evenings eating take-out (usually cold after taking care of baby1), so I happily passed my son over to my mother and ate decent hot food that I didn't have to try to cook with an infant. Twice, my own mother asked why I didn't just leave my food and leave the restaurant when my son got a bit (trust me, that was only a bit, people) fussy. I may have gotten a look on my face similar to a starving predator facing down something that wanted the gazelle for itself.

At that point, I didn't have internet, except at work. So I spent my days working and my nights feeding the baby while I watched cable TV. Alone. For months at a time.

When I moved to my current small town, I went out ONE time with coworkers. We went to the bar for my birthday. It was my 30th birthday. One of my coworkers called my mother because she thought I was getting "too drunk".

I can't even explain how being collected by my mother at 30 years old because people don't TRUST me to be able to take care of myself... how that completely shut down any further attempts I might have made to have any kind of social life. After all, it was a small town. Everyone knew my mother.

So after 4 years of no social interactions outside of work and a few minor events, I started a business, met my now-husband, and got pregnant again. For several reasons, which have since been resolved, I started my daughter's life as a single mother still. My mom took us to see Juno. I got to watch 30 minutes before baby2 started to fuss.

I had no car - I was there with my mom who was still watching the movie with my son. So I spent the entire movie pacing the hall with a fussy baby. For some reason, I wasn't really eager to try that again any time soon.

So, that's all ancient history, and it sucked but it was what it was and now I'm okay. Except, apparently, I'm not okay.

Even now, just thinking about all of this (not something I usually do), I am fighting back tears. It was hard to think that after all the people telling me I'm a good mom, and I did so well when solo, etc., etc... I was traumatized.

Even now, the thought of being a single parent again is so painful that I just want to curl up into a ball. I am literally gun-shy of it. It closes my emotions off except for this bitter, clogging pain. It shuts my mind down except for these memories going through my head over and over.

And I never even knew that it had affected me so deeply. Despite the fact that I do Shadow Work ALL THE TIME, I never knew. I dig for things like this, regularly, but I had no idea it was there.

So the lesson here is this: Shadow Work is never done. There is always more to work on. And just because trauma is hidden, doesn't mean you are not traumatized. And just because you are traumatized, doesn't make you broken... just a little chipped.

Witches In Action, Witches Inaction

Recently, several groups of witches performed a collective hex or curse on President Donald Trump and his administration. This caused a lot of discussion about the threefold law, aka the Wiccan Rede.

Specifically, the Rede says (with many wording variations): Do No Harm. A hex or a curse is meant to do, at least most of the time, SOME harm, usually harm triggered by or stemming from certain behaviors of the recipient.

So why would it be okay to do this?

Now, I don't personally follow the Rede. I'm not Wiccan, and I have no beliefs regarding that. However, let's pretend we all do follow the Rede, for the sake of this discussion. What could make a hex or curse acceptable under the Rede?

What if it is our only alternative to sitting back and doing nothing?

The argument is that the Trump administration is a clear and present threat to several demographics, specifically virtually all minorities - women, people of color, LGBTQ, immigrants, Muslims and Jews (and, by extrapolation, any other non-Christian religious group), or even people PERCEIVED to be any one of these.

People aren't necessarily asking if the Hispanic is a real illegal immigrant before harassing him, or if the woman is an actual Muslim before ripping the scarf off of her head, or if the teen boy is really LGBTQ or just more feminine in his behavior than they like.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, the go-to organization for determining hate groups, has reported a significant spike in hate crimes since the election. Trump's executive orders have resulted in a dangerous and/or extremely discriminatory set of policies towards minorities. His administration, via support for the GOP-heavy congress, has resulted in a slew of proposed laws that also discriminate against minorities.

Make no mistake, love him or hate him, Trump has had an effect on discrimination and bias in the US.

So, in the simplest form, the choice is to harm Trump and his administration via a hex or curse, or to sit back and allow the harm of thousands of innocent people by the rippling effects of Trump being in power.

Oh, but Karma will take care of Trump and all the others.

Really? And how does Karma do that? Earthquakes? Heart attacks? Other "random" things that just happen?

Rule #1 of spell casting is that spells do not manifest in a void. You want to do a spell to find work? Fine, but you still need to apply for jobs. You want to do a spell to find love? Great, but you still need to be a lovable person, and get out and meet people.

Karma often works the same way. It isn't just people getting what they deserve through great cosmic effects. It's also people getting what they deserve by reaping the reactions of what they sow. If we suppress our reactions because KARMA, we are inhibiting the way the world creates consequences.

We need to stop being afraid of our power. Spells and energy work are our strength, and that includes the darker magics of hexes and curses. We are like a bodybuilder walking past a man attempting to rape a woman. We can "control ourselves" and keep our power on a leash while we call the police, and hope they get here on time. Or we can use our power to hurt the man and punch him in the face.

I'm not ashamed to admit, I punch people in the face. #Resist

Weighing In: Heavy thoughts on obesity

Well, some are cold, and some are lukewarm...

As a fat pagan woman, I have been following many of the various discussions on Pagans and obesity (or fat pagans) with interest. I wasn't going to chime in, but I did - on Z's show and a few comments.

But now is the time; I am making a point: mind your own fat business!

Probably the most common argument I've seen for stepping in when a pagan sees another pagan who is fat is this: "When harm is being done, it is my spiritual/religious duty to step up."

Goddess gets body image insecurity?

Ok, I immediately went to abortion rights on that one.

That's right, I'm saying that that excuse is used for Christians (and others) imposing their values, beliefs and opinions upon the masses, regardless of their own personal beliefs, regardless of circumstances.

I'm gonna say it... proselytizing.

You want to impose your own sense of what is right and wrong for me and my body? I hear there is an opening in the Westboro Baptist Church.


I would argue that most Pagans would consider it MORE in line with their beliefs that, with only the most extreme exceptions, it's our job to TRUST each other to do what is right for ourselves and the rest of the world.

Ruben likes his women with
fleshy goodness!

Yeah, I brought out the T-word.

You should trust me that I am a reasonably intelligent human being with complexities that you prolly don't understand.
You should trust me that I have the same googling capability that you have, and that I am either as informed as you are or have CHOSEN to remain ignorant.
You should trust me that if I WANT to get better, I will do what I can to do so, and if I don't, there is NOTHING that you poking your nose in will do to change that.

You should trust that I am a "grown-ass woman" with decision-making capability and that, whether you are talking about the layer of fatty tissue under my epidermis or the reproductive organs in my lower abdomen, MY BODY = MY CHOICE still applies.

I don't understand how being nosy or pushy is the way you show you care. Personal responsibility is just that: personal AND a responsibility. It is mine to make or break. My body to use or abuse, to trash or treasure.

Gods, if I came even close to
having her body fat...
I'd eat MORE ICE CREAM!

On a similar note, it came to my attention that an Olympic swimming contender was called "fat." Let me clarify: This woman swims. She swims often and she swims fast. She does so to the point that she beat out most of an entire country (Australia) to qualify for the Olympics, an honor most people I know have never even APPROACHED. She has won EIGHT medals during the last 12 years. "Together with Emily Seebohm, Alicia Coutts and Melanie Schlanger, she won a silver medal for Australia in the 4 × 100 m medley relay." Oh, wait. That makes NINE medals. How many have YOU won?

 She's now 26 and has grown a bit of a pooch. To quote, "The question that comes up is: Does it matter? Is it the media's place to question the fitness of an athlete who has already proved herself by making the team in the first place?" Exactly. She's done 4 Olympics and 9 medals more than pretty much any journalist, blogger or commentator who has decided to judge her body (in an unforgiving and less then flattering swimsuit, no less).

To those who did judge her, go win a frickin' Olympic medal and then you MIGHT get to say something. Otherwise, SHUT UP.

Holley Mangold weighs in at 346 pounds (157 kilograms);
she can also bench press a small BUS!
"[Her] personal record in the combined snatch and
clean-and-jerk is 255 kilos (562.2 pounds)."

UPDATE: This was in my YahooNews feed today. The epic quote? Here: "The Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation (WSFF), a UK charity aiming to get more women into sport to build self-esteem and confidence, said only 12 percent of British girls at age 14 were doing enough exercise to meet recommended guidelines. WSFF Chief Executive Sue Tibballs said their research found negative body image was consistently cited as a barrier for girls participating in exercise as popular culture gave out the message it was more important to be thin than fit." (Emphasis, mine.)

Don't be friends with fat people

This is more of an annoyance than anything else... You look at a "Top 10" ways to keep on your diet/cut calories/lose weight in one week type of list, and there is always something like it. It's the advice that you eat like your companions, so don't eat with fat people.

What?!?

The size of your waistband is
directly proportional to
the number of days
you will live when
Starbucks runs out of foamed milk.

There are many reasons this is a load of crap, and the least of them is that it's dead wrong. That advice makes many assumptions that may or may not be the case.

Assumption #1: Your fat friends are fat cuz they have no will power/self regulation about eating.
This is wrong simply because apparently whoever came up with this gem has never heard of the concept of different metabolisms. Never mind the slew of metabolic disorders that can result in someone who eats only 1500 calories a day ballooning to over 300 lbs. That's right, some people cannot eat the same foods as those skinny-minnies and keep their weight stable. Some people can eat just enough to stay alive, but put on weight. And as much as modern society doesn't want to believe it, some people are just weight gainers.

In fact, historically, humans BRED for that. You heard right. We bred obesity into our genes. How? Well, back in the eras of Raphael, feudalism, and regular food shortages (most of human history) the attractive ones were the ones who had the resources to pack on a few extra pounds. Those who had caloric reserves carried around on their thighs and butts were more likely to weather famines. So, who has babies and passes on their genetic joys? Chubby, survivor chicas!

Yeah, NOW I feel like
downing a pint of B&J's...

Assumption #2: When you see someone eating more, you will eat more.
Or maybe you just give yourself permission to fill up instead of maintaining an iron fist on your eating so that YOU don't look like the over-indulging one. Maybe?

Assumption #3: You are just one subconscious stimulus away from ending up on the Biggest Loser.
That's right, your body and mind are conspiring against you being the stick-thin hottie you know you can be, if you can just turn off those stupid "you're hungry, EAT!" signals. Or maybe you should take a lesson from this:

This is the picture of a
TEMPTRESS!!

A show that I forget the name of that got cancelled pretty fast had this character, a young, pretty actress who was trying out for a part in a movie. This part required her to gain about 30 lbs., so she started eating, and eating. This character was also the token bitch, and while she was eating someone commented that she was being a really nice person during this time. The response was (paraphrased): "Yeah, I thought she was a mean person, but it turns out she was just hungry!"

I died laughing. But seriously, I get grumpy when I'm hungry. Stormie gets grumpy when he's hungry. I can safely assume that many people (if not all) get grumpy when they are hungry. Don't be grumpy, hang out with fat people (cuz they MAKE you eat).


Enough with the assumptions. Two points to make:
Really? Now maybe you don't want to listen to me, seeing as I'm capable of surviving any famine Mother Nature can throw down, but is life so unbearable as a non-model-skinny person that a couple extra calories once in a while is going to be enough to throw away what is very likely a decent friendship? Really?

And, is that the kind of superficial biased attitude that we should in any way allow our kids to grow up with? By limiting our friends either by their weight or by the weight they will "MAKE" us, doesn't that mean those little observing everything, missing nothing rug rats should be picking up on the message of "Don't be friend with fat people."

I'm telling you, I'm an awesome friend.