What You Do: Orlog vs Prosecution

Once again, a woman is in the news for making an accusation against a man.

I say "in the news," but I mean "dragged through the mud." Statistics are difficult to get - how do you prove the consent of someone other than by self-reporting? - but generally fall between 2-10% unfounded. This is VERY low for false reporting of a crime, and isn't even restricted to intentional false reporting. "Unfounded" is a pretty vague definition that could mean anything from "not a legal rape" to "not enough evidence to pursue" to "the victim is not sure anything even actually happened."

So we are, again, having the discussion of how many women it takes to screw in a light bulb. The answer is, of course, dependent on whether the man's reputation might be besmirched rather than how such an action may have harmed the woman or women.

Many protests on the man's side revolve around the same old crap of "why did she wait?" This from people who hide spending sprees, gambling addictions, and even affairs from their spouses. People who keep hush-hush about seeing a therapist, wrecking their car while drunk, or having a kid that got busted for joy-riding.

Gee, I dunno. Why aren't you facing up the nasty parts of your life? Answer: Because it's uncomfortable and makes us feel weak or out of control. Compound a woman's choice to make an accusation like this with the sheer numbers that show that even reporting doesn't get much done and is likely to ruin the victim's life even more than the perpetrator's.

But, that's all nitpicking, because the war cry has been sounded: Innocent until proven guilty!

And I sigh, pick myself up and ready the same old tired explanation that is used in all of these situations, as well as when someone gets fired for being racist and the war cry is "free speech."

THOU SHALT NOT CONFLATE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES AND SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES

Free speech and the mandate of innocent until proven guilty are both intended to prevent the government, government entities, and tyrants/supervillains puppet-mastering the government from using the collective power of the government (specifically the executive branch) to oppress dissenting voices or violate freedoms with tissue-paper claims of criminal activity.

Neither free speech nor innocent until proven guilty is applicable to one's public reputation or how the free and individual citizens and businesses choose to react to that reputation, ie, örlög.

Quite frankly, it is frustrating that "I know they did this thing" isn't always enough. In fact, there are entire plots based on the loopholes that it can create (anyone remember "Double Jeopardy" with Ashley Judd?). But it is good that the word of a single person and no evidence is not enough to put someone in prison (theoretically).

However, your public reputation is not dictated by the rules of the US Constitution. And, as I've had to explain to my hubby recently, you don't get to pick what your örlög is. Your behavior and OTHER PEOPLE'S INTERPRETATION OF THAT BEHAVIOR is your örlög, for better or worse, fair or not.

Fair is when people accused of crimes, often by dozens of victims, are put out of positions of power, influence, etc. Not is when the victims are blamed and dragged through the mud, and the perpetrators get to resume their fame-based lifestyles after a few months off. Looking at you CK and company.

And who ever said life was fair?

A Pain in the Pain: Intellectualizing & Erasure

Pain comes in many forms and several degrees. There is physical pain, emotional pain and combinations therein. Most doctors have a handy little pain chart so that people can express the levels of pain that they feel.

Yet many chronic pain sufferers note that medical staff will often downplay their pain, as if the person feeling it - literally the only person who can feel it and, thus, assess it - doesn't really know how it feels.

We see the same thing happening with emotional pain. Lost loved ones, break-ups, betrayal - people frequently hide their pain to avoid someone telling them "it isn't that bad", or worse, comparing it to a similar event in their own lives.

Here's the thing, experience and the nuances of bodies and relationships automatically means that there is no way for you to know how another person is experiencing their pain. Period.

If someone lost a grandparent, and you lost a grandparent, maybe they had a close relationship that makes their pain different. Maybe they regret not having a closer relationship. Who knows? Not you.

If someone exclaims that what they feel, physically, is the worst pain they've ever felt, why would you say that's not true? Maybe you have broken a bone, as well, but was it in the same spot? Do you both have the same sensitivity to pain due to numbers of nerves, myelination, how close pain receptors are to the damaged part? Do you have the same pain experiences to base the "worst" on?

I'm going to say no.

We like to do this. We compare and contrast what we see in other people against what we have actually experienced for ourselves. And we judge them, usually with the bias in favor of our own experiences being "worse." Like it's some kind of sadism competition.

I've done this myself in varying degrees, but sometimes, the situation is a socialized one.

I have to admit, when videos started up showing men "experiencing labor," I laughed as hard as any woman. Why? Because I've spent my entire life with men comparing various injuries to labor, as if repeatedly tensing every muscle in your body tighter than you ever thought they could clench to push out a baby could somehow compare to... anything else.

It bothers me because, while women are often portrayed as fragile, sensitive and overly emotional, they are also seen as being flawed in experiencing their own bodies. If people are fragile, doesn't that mean they really DO experience more physical pain? If people are emotional, doesn't that mean they really DO feel more emotional pain?

An article recently declared that doctors have "admitted" that women can experience menstrual cramps at the same pain levels as heart attacks. I turned to my husband and said "This is why women don't know they are having a heart attack; they are used to that level of pain."

What I didn't say is that they are also told that the level of pain many women experience on a monthly basis is also something they are humiliated for. Why would anyone admit to that level of pain after years of being put down, ignored, or bullied for experiencing? Wouldn't you blow off the pain of a heart attack too?

Emotionally, the situation is parallel. If someone is sensitive, they are often humiliated or bullied over it. If they complain, we say things like "I went through the same thing" or "you just need a thicker skin." Then society doubles down on this by arguing that (mostly) women need to leave abusive partners.

I guarantee most people on pain medicine
wished a massage would fix it.

Dude! They've been told all their lives to put up with it, and now you want them to suddenly know better? Dude...

We also tend to bully and humiliate and shame people who take medicine for pain management, prioritizing controlling drugs over finding solutions to the addictive nature of our most effective pain drugs, prioritizing "more spiritual" treatments over pills, and shaming people who just can't deal with something they are experiencing but that the shamers are just guessing at.

As there are millions of gods and goddesses representing millions of nuances of emotions (love, sex), actions (war, protection), ideas (truth, honor), and more, we need to HONOR the emotional and physical differences in people's experiences and perspective of pain. We need to stop making it about what we THINK, and start making it about what they FEEL.

The Problem With Integrity

“With integrity, you have nothing to fear, since you have nothing to hide. With integrity, you will do the right thing, so you will have no guilt.” - Zig Ziglar

This quote was waiting for me in my in-box, like a crouching panther about to attack.

I get it. I sometimes look for the simple tales - the one with the black hat bad guys and the white hat good guys. The ones where the good guy always knows what to do and it’s always right. How simple, how pure such tales are.

I can’t write them. It’s not like I don’t know how. That’s how children’s stories go. It’s a basic plot with characters who are iconic. Dare I say, archetypal?

I guess it would be more honest to say I won’t write them. To explain why, I have to unpack everything I find wrong about the quote above.

“With integrity, you have nothing to fear, since you have nothing to hide.”

First of all, this assumes that hiding something is counter to having integrity. But that’s not the case. I can’t spill my entire life story every time I meet someone. Or even every time I befriend someone. I can’t wear my life on my sleeve. That’s called oversharing.

And it means there will always be things you don’t share about yourself. Some of that may include bad behavior you’ve since grown out of. And sometimes, it just doesn’t mean enough to you to share with other people. That is, you forget about it.

This also assumes that things that you hide are all things you don’t want other people to know about because of nefarious reasons. That’s bunk. Sometimes, I’m just embarrassed, like when I can’t walk on ice because I’m a clutz. Sometimes, it’s an issue that I have that no one needs to know about, like how ice sends fear shooting through me with thoughts of pain and death because I slipped once and shattered my ankle, and sat in the snow screaming for help at 5 am. Life changing, yes. Something everyone needs to know about? Probably not.

Fear isn’t just about what people will think of you or how they will judge you. Sometimes fear is the primal reminder that we are mortal and may have brushed up against death at some point.

“With integrity, you will do the right thing, so you will have no guilt.”

I have got to move to B&W world where these quotes come from. Just because you have integrity, doesn’t mean you automatically know what decisions are right. Gods, that would be awesome! Evil things would never happen by accident. Bad stuff would never be an unintended consequence. It would all be by choice, making those who caused bad things to instantly be the bad guy.

Life doesn’t work like that, and realistic writing plays with the grays. Good people make bad choices, and no amount of integrity can change that.

However, people with ego and a belief in the strength of their own integrity will actually believe that they cannot make a bad choice. If their actions have a negative and unintended consequence, they will blame it on the victim (“she must have deserved it”) or on someone else (“look what you made me do”). To these people, there is no need to feel guilt or apologize for accidental or unintended bad things. If fate put you in the way, you must have earned that negativity somehow.

I could go on, evaluating the way that this quote extends into social mindsets, like meritocracy, and the pros and cons associated. But I should keep this short, and that would be a thesis-sized project.

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.

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.