Protest

Protest is the way that those holding the same fears or hopes gather to demonstrate their concerns. The collected persons are supposed to be peaceful but we know that behind it all,  they are not actually feeling peaceful. Most demonstrations are built on strong feelings, sometimes of celebration gone overboard or of anger and frustration or of a specific cause by an organization. And while the protest or demonstration begins as peaceful, too often the emotional weight of the opposing sides erupts and like a match to straw, it will burst into flame. People are hurt. A tiny physical shove, a rude word with retaliation and it's enough to see things get completely out of hand.  That kind of "flame" denies the whole concept of "peaceful demonstration" by those who thought they simply wanted to express their combined concerns. It's called a riot when tempers are loosed and physical acts are committed.  And that's when we call in the law keepers. Their difficult job is, while remaining neutral, having to cope with people who have lost reason. The law keepers put their own lives at stake trying to make order out of chaos. Demonstrating and protesting began hundreds of years ago and now there are those who are professionals at it. They have been trained and coached to know how to deal with what was once merely a group of individuals who had a reason to come together to make a show of numbers. These times, professional  demonstration folk teach methods of  appropriate attire, signage and strategies and, yes, even how to seek permission to hold demonstrations with notice so that there is police presence. It's a sort of accepted form of saying "yes" or "no" to  the group cause. I always hark to the animal world to find sense in some human reactions. How does a beast protest? Sometimes going back to the most simple view helps to clarify, the complexities of our modern human behaviours. A group of bees or wasps will gather to protect their nest, a clan of gorillas will make a united front to fend off intruders, a flock of crows will collect by scores in trees for a fallen mate. We aren't that far from our natural world when you think about it.  What is worse with we humans, is that we have intelligence, the kind that wants, always, for us to improve and further to improve on improvements. It gets us a long way in most things, but it can also get us into a lot of trouble. Part of the problem is when powers won't listen to individuals and therefore, people feel forced to find a way to be heard. If the number of votes is what it takes to be heard, there is no other route than to gather in numbers, and the larger the number, the more votes there are to attend. Whether this demonstration is a move towards peace or not, depends upon the outcome, and the peaceful outcome depends, oddly enough on the individual.

Secrets

Secrets are like the medusa with its many moving aspects and arms. I am not fond of secrets, preferring information to be open, but stating that is, of course, naive. Secrets fall into the domain of the holder. It's up to  individuals or other bodies to manage the secrets they hold. Most affairs are able to be revealed while others are not. Governmental bodies are leaning strongly toward opening public awareness and offering information as a tool in the prevention of suspicion and negativism. And it is true that trust can only be earned through  revelation. The more truth, the more trust. Personal and private secrets are exempt, naturally, if they have to do with matters that are only personal and private. At a meeting I attended recently, the elected executive presented a motion that all their meetings would in future be in camera and that observers at their executive meetings would not be welcome. Observers, by law or rule, are not allowed to speak at executive meetings, but they hear what is presented and know exactly what issues council discusses and decides upon. The laws or rules also protect certain private information by allowing executives to call for moving into in camera sessions. The reason the in camera motion for all meetings of executive, was the fear that discussions among the executive might be passed on by the observers to the detriment of the organization,  thus the motion to go entirely and always, into the secrecy of in camera. There is, indeed, valid concern in that conclusion. One must assume that observers, being directly involved as members of the body, in matters of the executive, will be discreet. There is always fear of rumor and that, too, is valid. But observers as electors of the executive, a trust position, should have the intelligence to quell information that is not suitable to talk about publicly. There again, trust works both ways, Executive trusts those who attend their meetings and those observing should honor that right and use discretion. But rumors will happen. It's part of human nature to love speculating and guessing and bandying about issues. In some ways, it is helpful to look at issues in many different ways and consider outcomes, both real and speculative.  At the same time, it can be dangerous, but only if those listening and discussing, forget to seek out verification of information gained via rumor mills before passing on information. Facts remain facts, and need to be polished up a bit by finding those who have them. Group dynamics have rules and these are to find leaders who will do the work of many to help the few, but with trust that is mutually respected. Secrets need to be harnessed and let out, occasionally, for airing. But watch out that they don't gallop off!

Woman Alone

Women alone, are those who have been left alone in some way: widowed, divorced, abandoned by family, by choice and so on. They aren't all elderly whatever "elderly" means. Most women are not adept at using tools to maintain their homes or are interested in driving into the thick of city traffic. We spend a lot of time at home. Going out walking, either after dark or in places that are less than safe, is what keeps women from venturing out alone. The other day, an acquaintance asked me if I had gone into the park to enjoy the new pathway in the woods. I had to answer that I had not, and when asked why not, told him that I didn't walk alone in forests. The questioner forgot that couples don't have to think about safety, but we singles, do. It's the same with driving. I use familiar routes and don't go on long motor trips alone. I want to, but it isn't a good idea. Again, safety. Young women are also cautious fortunately, and thus go about in groups. Another hazard of living alone is finding services for small repairs. While the job is small, such as adjusting a cupboard door so that it doesn't stick, the cost is not. For a worker to come out it's around 100 dollars or more with time and supplies added on. The reason I've been given, is that there's a truck load of tools ready to do the job and it has costs. Frankly, Scarlett, I don't give a darn about the tool truck. I have a screwdriver. All I need is for someone to put a teaspoon of gas in their vehicle and spend 10 minutes adjusting the little thing on the cupboard door. DIY you say, but I say, that's not what I speak of. It doesn't cost one hundred dollars to come to my door from a few blocks away. The excuse that "everyone charges the same" doesn't help my budget either. I was at the grocery store and the clerk looked at me askance when I asked her if she were going to load the bags into my cart before I left. She was surprised but  did it reluctantly. Since when, at a major upper level grocery chain, does the clerk have to be asked to place bags in the cart? I take my car in for oil and get a list of costly things that need to be done. What do I know? I always ask the mechanic to prioritize and time the items he lists. The eyeballs roll skyward but he does it. What do I know about cars? What does anyone know in this specialty computerized age? Times have changed and we seem to live in a growing myopic world. There are many advantages to living alone and making all your own decisions, but the downside is a bit of a slippery slope.

Taboo Subjects

I was once advised never to, in good company, discuss money, religion or politics. What do people nearly always end up discussing but precisely these topics in one way or another?  It's not to say they do so peaceably and that proves the fear that they might be inflammatory and thus, should be avoided. That leaves the weather, the kids and one's health as discusson and how boring is that?  One should not deny the three topics stated earlier, because they are not actually the issue. It is behaviors when discussing the topics, that  are to blame.  Topics such as money, religion and politics often, since they are very personal, become confrontational it is true. But should that fact deny discussion? It seems to me that if one is discussing or even arguing, there are societal rules about doing so in a way that is not offensive. What are the rules? First someone offering an opinion, is doing merely that. Those hearing it, should listen and may argue the point after, giving their ideas and making their points, without expecting to force them on others. Sometimes you must simply compromise and let it go. It is a discussion, not a war. If one can't discuss without anger, one shouldn't discuss at all. Some argue about money matters. Money matters even for those who say "it isn't about money". Most of the time, it is about money. Almost every thing we do and talk about, has, in some way, something to do with money. Money has never been the evil, but how we use it often is. And then, comes religion as a topic. We all have it or not.  From what I glean from our constitution, it is a freedom and a right to choose a religion. There isn't just one religion that we have to practice. What you choose is yours and what I choose is mine. Here is an example. As I have heard about one particular religion: "oh, ha ha, you get your sins forgiven and then, you can just go out and do them all over again". I guess those who use that uniformed position, forget the bottom line, "go and sin no more". It's human nature to take things out of context as argument. But it is unfair argument and that should be pointed out. Next we argue about politics.  I thought a political choice was something personal and private and above judgement. Whatever party you choose is your preference, and while others may try to convince you that their choice is better, and tell you why, it won't change your mind if you are adamant. And it should not lead to fisticuffs.  Your personal beliefs in whatever, are entirely yours and as such, are protected under the law. Why then do some individuals persist in forcing their choices on others who have different beliefs? And why is it disallowed to discuss such situations publicly, when they are clearly  in our country's constitution as rights and privileges. Learning and practicing the rules of debate and argument would make our lives much more peaceful, publicly and personally if only we used them.

To Bra Or Not To Bra

To bra or not to bra, that is the question - apparently. There's a recent move for women to go bra-less. I didn't know you couldn't or shouldn't. I always thought it was a choice,  Apparently, the women who opt for this current kind of freedom, feel that somehow they've been denied it, but I recall in the hippy sixties, it was common for women to dress without the benefit of Lycra and wire. I am not sure that most women would be comfortable freeing this part of their anatomies, but I know that some men wouldn't mind at all. Just as staring would become a factor among women and others, if they freed certain parts of their anatomy. Why this is, is the sexual mystique that we all live within. It's a kind of unwritten law we consider to be acceptable under our modesty rules to hide what we certainly know is there. Not wearing a bra might cause somewhat of a situation in a social gathering, and in a way, the idea of it, intrigues me. I am not sure if we are ready to find it acceptable  to "let it all hang out", a term used in the article. Dressing bra-less in a light-weight fabric might cause one to receive a lot of unwanted attention regardless of good intentions. In the piece on bra-lessness, apparently women are flocking to get their new and "free", looks onto social media as quickly as possible. I am, therefore, not sure if their motivations are all that pristine in nature. No pun intended.  It certainly makes one wonder how much of this sudden display, is bravado or simply attention garnering. And why is that? I know many women who would find going bra-less quite uncomfortable since they are more endowed than others who feel it of no concern at all. We are varied in our shapes and weights and personal mores. And one should consider why bras were invented in the first place. I suppose they arose out of the corset era where anything visibly female was either exaggerated such as bustles, or denied such as the wooden fortified corsets. Evening wear in the most decorous eras strangely, was  freeing especially regarding corsets that permitted women's chest not only to bare, but to bear themselves as much as possible: their proud decolletage. Bulges were welcomed all framed in ruffles and lace, but only in the evenings. Not a woman I know, today, finds going bra buying enjoyable. We search often in vain, to find ones that don't pinch, squeeze or let us down. It's a chore of searching, sorting and trying on. And no one has invented a truly easy one of these garments to put on. They fasten mostly in the back. Why? Is it because many women used to have maids standing behind, to help them with that task? Why can't all bras be made to fasten in the front where one doesn't have to go to contortion lengths to fasten those tiny hooks easily and quickly. And straps? They fall down at the shoulders or dig into them or rub in unfriendly ways. The ladies who find bras easiest are the ones who don't need them in the first place. Theirs are hardly-there little lacy bits that are more a pretty excuse than a worker.  Ah well, we shall see how long the movement lasts. Could be but a bulge in time.

Terry Fox Day

Terry Fox is a hero who will never be forgotten. Today marks the anniversary which no Canadian will forget. Terry's will to run and raise money to further cancer research shall continue to be remembered until his goal of achieving a cure has been reached. While that goal has found its end in a few ways, cancer, a many-headed monster remains. Part of the problem is precisely that: cancer isn't simply one disease. It is of one main character, but because it is so varied in its locales and kinds, it is not something easy to "cure". This morning, on radio, my favorite medium, I heard a chap speak about accompanying Mr. Fox on his run across the country. Terry had arrived in Ontario and this gentleman assisted the Fox entourage, a tiny one, in its hopeful effort by one young man, to achieve a fund-raising run from the Atlantic to the Pacific, Terry's home. As we all know, sadly, it couldn't complete that, because the cancer re-appeared and the run ended as did Terry Fox's life, not long after. This young man knew how many others fell from this terrible disease and didn't complete their lives just as he couldn't also. Even that defeat was not defeat. I lost many of my people from cancer as do we all, and if a cure is found, it will be momentous. No one who has lost those close to them can describe what it's like to see or hear the fatal words, I'm sorry to tell you that it's cancer. For doctors to have to make this announcement, is the worst part of their work. They know that not all cancers are ones that can't be beaten, but they also know how personally devastating it is to fight the disease no matter what the outcome. They also know that you can't keep it away by eating certain foods or avoiding certain habits. It can happen to anyone, at any time of their life. There are ways of trying, however, and some cancers are kept away when people live as healthy a lifestyle as possible. Smoking and other substances inhaled or consumed, that prevent  life sustaining oxygen from doing its work in our bodies is known to open the chances of cancer entering a life. And to use excuses such as, I know those who smoked all their lives and they didn't die of cancer, are not a valid reason to take a chance or affect that of others. Allowing yourself to work in a place that is conducive to inviting cancerous effects because it pays well, is another invalid excuse. Taking care of our bodies is our biggest and most important responsibility. We can't care about or take care of our families or friends by abusing the privilege of life and doing what we know may possibly cause cancer. Life is free and it's all we have. Even those who have endless amounts of money will tell you that your health is a far greater asset than gold. Gold won't save you from cancer but it can help those who are in the business of trying to find out how to, and they need a bit of your gold today. Remember Terry Fox who gave his life, his golden life for others. Give.

Radio Remember

TV doesn't do it all. Well, Netflix comes close with its no ads, not-just-blockbusters, lotsa choice formats, but radio has it, over all. Nonsense, I hear screamed in the background., televison gives me pictures, a thousand...   No, not nonsense: good sense. When I get up in the morning, and am busily scrambling, brewing and toasting, I can't be watching a screen or thumb-dumbing on a device. I have things to do and places to go where no man goes, other than, yes, the radio! I dug up an old transistor radio (those under the golden age will have to use the encyclopedia here) that I keep on the bathroom shelf and while I go about the ablution business in the early mornings, it keeps me informed, entertained and in "the loop". When I exit the small room, I am busily going about keeping down the dust, fluffing up the pillows and generally making the place presentable. My hands are not going to hold some little electronic bit to communicate because I am in the real world, and the real world is demanding my pro-active attention. The radio is doing its best to make my life more intellectually complete, while at the same time helping me avoid future serious arthritis in the thumb. Aside; I do fear for our texting young and their joint damage fifty years from now when I'll be fertilizing daisies. What one does in early life seems to show up, later, and it's no joke. But, back on topic. Radio is quality, at least the government sponsored station that I adhere to. It keeps me up to date on world issues, and unlike newspapers, provides me with more than headlines and compost filler. It speaks to me hands-free in the car and is my only emergency tool in the event of an event. I can receive tsunami directions, blizzard warnings, stock market trends and road snarls, not to mention, soothing my hungry, raging beast tummy returning home from work in a traffic jam. Radio is fun when you pick up shows that flirt with comedy or introduce you to people doing small but important things, as well as those on the other side of Good. If we want, truly, to be active citizens, we need to be introduced to the huge variety of people in this varied world we live in. We need to see the good and the bad, but always with that comfortable distance radio provides. Music and the arts are seldom covered as fully as on the radio. Seldom, do we get as much background information from experts in fields of current interest as in radio interviews or essays. We are speechified by politicians and professors and the proletariat, alike.  And best, there are no flashy ads to interrupt or interfere in our thoughts on a subject. Sometimes I wonder how many radio fans are out there who still enjoy the chat of a "host" or the music of "our very own", the voices we have come to know and love and trust. Turn on the radio.

Blaming Bullies

You've heard it, too: blamers blaming someone or something for the misery in their lives, be it large or small. They rant on for hours about what someone is doing to them, but have little or nothing to say about what they are doing to stop it, no matter what the cost. A friend of mine describes her husband as a monster and yet they have been together for over fifty years and reared a family in the midst of their horrendous marriage. When I managed to talk her into telling me why she put up with it, the answer was "it's easier to just go along with it and anyway, I need the financial support". Easier? What? How easy is fifty plus years of putting up with a bully of a man or in a man's case, a bully of a woman, eating up your valuable lifetime, staining it with misery. How easy is it for kids to witness, and unfortunately ape, that kind of situation? I don't like divorce any more than the next person, but bullying is something intolerable and it must stop. In the case of boss ogres, a well paying job is hard to leave, but hating and fearing to go to work daily, just isn't worth it. There are other jobs, other men, other women. If the offending parties cannot cure their sickness of needing to push others around, I guess the only way to solve it, is to leave the situation. Get out and stay out. There are too many safety options available now for women or men to allow bullying in their lives. We have shelters and doctors and policemen who are there to help. Not all are helpful, but seeking out one who is, is better than living in sorrow. We have one life, to quote the old saying, and it's all we have. Just one. Why live it in misery under the rule of a bully? Blame, unfortunately,  lies not only with the perpetrator in that kind of problem, it also lies with the person who does nothing about it. Fear? Yes, there is fear and a lot of it, especially when the children are dragged into the picture. Your children, however, need a full life, too, even with only one good parent. But fear shouldn't turn us into blobs of jelly. We are all equally worthy of a perfect life. There are times when, no matter what, we have to act to save our own lives. When your ogre of a boss treats you like a slave, it's you bending under the will of a bully.  Stress will destroy you sooner or later. Money isn't everything. Happiness and a peaceful existence, come first. Bullies have this interesting pattern, and it's written in stone. They treat their victims horrifically and then they turn around and become a wonderful, generous prince or princess, and give you their gifts of regret and promises and kind words, and back you go, right into the middle of the problem again. It's the last time, you say to yourself. But you know the fear that once again, as ever, the abuse will return just as it always has. You are the one who has to act. The bully won't stop, ever. Blame yourself for a change. Do what you need to do for yourself, and fix it.

Not About Books

Book clubs are a fad. Everyone I know belongs to at least one book club. Why? Reading is more something you do because it's a habit, but it's also something that you need to stimulate your mind - or should be. Books inspire people and teach people, they don't simply entertain. So often, I hear a book clubber say, all I want is to be entertained when I read a book; I am not, after all, taking a course. Very well, but what is meant by that because "entertainment" means something different to each person? Some like mysteries, others, adventure, yet others, to read the latest best sellers and so on down the shelf. Book clubs who study books in detail with lists of questions and on-line bios of the authors, struggle to find books that their patrons will enjoy. Not an easy job. Like running a book store, the leader can't, as they do, depend entirely upon what commercial sales gurus tell them. They have to rely entirely on their own judgement of their audiences of readership. In a book club with which I enjoy the privilege of having begun, the members comprise, other than the ever-present popular mystery/detective/spy kinds of fans,  those who like non-fiction, western, fantasy and horror tales. To select one book for study, that excites all of them alike, is impossible. That is why, I don't choose to sacrifice one particular book for discussion at our sessions. And that leads me to wonder why these dear people come month after month. The answer is, to socialize, to debate and discuss, not really what the book is about, but what their ideas, stimulated by the book subject, become. Book clubs are just another, what we used to call "coffee klatches". They are opportunities to have contact with other people who read and want to say something about what they read. The coffee becomes noisy wine therapy, not whining, although that occurs, too. But there are times when one wonders if interest will flag, and members will simply become bored having to listen to themselves and each other, blabbing on and on about what they read. The saving grace, is that authors continue to pump out books at alarming rates and not all of them are ho-hum series stuff with big name jackets and recycled plots using current events as the basis. Some books are fresh and new, and delve into human nature in such a way, that we find ourselves buried somewhere in the middle.  It's not about books but about seeking  treasure from an author's brain and throwing it into the pot to mix with ours at book clubs. Long may book clubs thrive. It's not all about books.

Scent-sible

Fads seem to catch on and go viral. One of the recent ones is allergies. While some allergies are true afflictions that need medical attention, others are merely, I believe, ways of seeking to control their environment by something they simply don't like, therefore, it becomes their "allergy". And it gets them a lot of attention, however brief. The other day, a woman sidled up to me, one I have known for over a year, and kindly (I think) informed me that my body lotion made her allergic reaction flare up. She said, "Sorry, but that's why I don't go near you. But I LIKE you." I will let you surmise what you will about that piece of dialogue. First, why didn't she tell me immediately so that I did not use the lotion. We'd both have been a lot happier. The matter had been bandied about by all of her associates and mine, until she was sent to "bell the cat". Was I offended? Yes, but not because of the scent I no longer use. I was offended at the delay informing me. The scent in the lotion which was made by a company that is proud of its non-allergenic products, was made of fragrant herbs and likely some preservatives. It was interesting to me that the lady in question, eats a large amount of garlic and doesn't wear deodorant. She also has herbal scented candles all around her domicile. Recreationally, and legally, she imbibes occasionally with another kind of herb that she smokes. Taking all of this information into mind, I deduced that her "allergy" is likely to be psychosomatic rather than a physical aberration. I hear about allergies so much that I begin to wonder if they aren't control issues. At a barbecue recently, while wearing the same innocent body lotion that is not detectable unless you are breathing down my neck, a young woman made a huge fuss about having to faint because she stood by me at one brief point. She said nothing to me, but staggered off toward the wildly smoking barbecue where she vented her abhorrence of my scent to all there who were also breathing in the pungent smoke at the scene. Her hand was at her forehead making me think of languishing ladies of an earlier era, and there were clutches of concerned people glancing my way. Two of her large dogs whose odour offended me, were also in rapt sympathy at her feet. I would have minded but for the fact that she was also "allergic" to everyone else's pot luck dishes. She was a vegan, gluten glucose and lactose intolerant. She couldn't touch alcohol and all water had to come from a non-plastic bottle and not one made with aluminum. Did I miss anything? Her infamy spread and lasted for at least an hour until everyone tired of giving her any more of their fun time and drifted off to the food table with their beer, perfume and shaving lotion. I joined in. I had worked up an appetite.

Artist Or "Artist"

Art is such a broad field that it's hard  to comment on it. Everyone has his/her own concept of what it means. I have been to art galleries all over the world, in small places and metropolises. I've seen art that looks like art to me and some that doesn't. I am not an art critic and I don't envy those who are. Art is expression of some sort, done in some sort of way, on something chosen to contain it. From that definition on, it's anyone's guess what art is. I once entertained the thought that I would like to study art seriously and took many courses toward that end. I could see that I simply didn't have the kind of dedication to become an artist, to tolerate the lack of funding and the energy that goes into it. Trying to make a living at any of the arts is almost impossible and if someone heading in that direction doesn't work in another paying field, they likely won't become rich doing it. Most real artists have studied drawing and much more formal preparation, for  a good part of their lives before they were taken seriously as artists. They have delved into colour and light and form and all the mechanical aspects of dealing with and putting material into some kind of form and order that makes art. Some amateur "artists" skip the training part and dive right into slapping paint on canvas or putting together some other sorts of things and calling it art. Who can judge whether it is art or "art", or as some would say, craft. The art that I have trouble with is when someone decides he or she is an "artist" and without conscience, whaps on paint according to something akin to what they've seen a genuine artist do, and glibly call it "my modern art". They attach high prices to their usually smeared, smudged and dripped creations and actually find a few buyers who don't know any better. They defend this nonsense by saying, well, if Picasso or Thompson or Kandinsky can do it, why can't I? What they don't realize or perhaps are ignorant of, is that true art is a matter of development over a long period of time. You can certainly "do" modern art but how did you get there? Where did you come from to get to that place? And where is it going next? The artists I mention, developed their styles by experiment and struggle to find what they wanted to say. It isn't easy to explain what they ended up accomplishing, and few of us, we ordinary people, understand that.  An artist begins in training the eye to see and draw, to learn  the basics and gradually moves on up from there. It takes a very long time and eons of thought and struggle. You can do what you want with paint and canvas, but you can't be a true artist unless you have progressed in a similar way. To paint a red dot in a white field is easy but what does it mean?  It's not what you did but where you came from and why and how you arrived at that point. That simple red dot is not simple at all.

Who Is Allowed In

I heard a very passionate person, today, on a radio broadcast, arguing that certain kinds of people should not be able to become Canadians because of what their country's beliefs are and that those beliefs don't fit with ours. She outlined what a Canadian is, according to her views, to our laws and the nature of our character, here. It gave me great cause for thought. I know that when I visit another country and enter it, I adhere to the laws of that land, and sometimes, while I may not agree entirely with what its concepts are, in respect of my being there, I know that I should at least try to understand the customs and behave appropriately as far as I am able. It tells them that I appreciate the differences between our mores and theirs. It becomes a form of global  friendship and understanding. In Canada we have laws, and they do not allow abuse of man or beast and no matter what one's tome of faith is, the law here stands before all else. Those who enter this country, when they come here to settle and stay and become Canadians, understand that. If they didn't, they wouldn't attempt to become citizens. They evidently want to make a change. And while the vast majority of us, came here, also, as immigrants, we should welcome others who want to be with us to form this country's grand plan.  I think we can, for the most part, trust that idea. The person arguing to disallow certain kinds of people with beliefs that are not legal here, forget the process for becoming a Canadian. We have freedom of religion and a whole lot of other constitutional freedoms and responsibilities in Canada and if you wish to be Canadian, you have to embrace them. Immigrants study these requirements and are tested, and are willing fully to adopt Canadian ways even though situations aren't the same as in their original countries. Where certain of their beliefs don't fit with the legalities of this country, they know it, and decide, regardless, to embrace true Canadianism. If we have concerns in that direction we should look carefully at our own beliefs. Few of us adhere strictly to our tenets, and if we did so perfectly, we might come pretty close to sainthood, no matter what our faiths are. But we know that the law is law and it rises above all else for everyone, no matter what one's personal beliefs are. We have to render unto Caesar as the saying goes. Welcoming other world citizens to our country is part of what makes us Canadian.

School

It's September and kids are going back to school. Some are staying in the protective arms of their parents who are their teachers and call that school. That's a topic for another day. Having spent  thirty years plying the hallways and classrooms of school, and now with the perspective of being retired, I have a few thoughts about what education is. First, I don't know any teachers whether considered "good" or not, who don't like their work. You can't be a teacher for long, and not love what you do. It's too hard a job. Lots of people think that teaching is easy. They may say, ha, you go in at nine and you're out at three; what's hard about that? First of all, I don't know any teacher who could accomplish that time frame. When you ask the same parent to come into the classroom and spend time there, they soon drop the "teaching is easy" fallacy. Teaching is a profession because, as in most professions, you have the responsibility of the way you do your work. You have a guide to follow, certainly, but it doesn't tell you how you will present the material. It doesn't tell you how you will use your ideas and resources to hope that your students enjoy learning. Those aspects are up to you, the teacher.  The first day of school, there will be large group of children looking at you and expecting to learn during the year, some important skills designed specifically for them. That alone is an onerous task when you really think about it.  There is enormous complexity in teaching thirty, more or less, young minds with their varied backgrounds and multitudes of unique qualities, a program  that tells you what to teach but not exactly how to get it across. You go to teacher's college to learn the how parts but putting your own personality into the mix on the job, is what makes it work or not.  And it doesn't always fit every child's needs no matter how hard you try. Every child has a different learning rate and style. As in real life, sometimes there are occasional natural classroom conflicts. Parents hear what "goes on" in the classroom through their children and while they don't filter any other important information in their lives that way, they believe, literally what their kids say. Most of what is said when parents ask their children, how did it go in school today?, is "okay" or "fine" but sometimes it's not, and that's when teacher and parent have to get together. The first teachers in life are parents. But when schools and home get together as teachers, that's when education is complete. It's the best opportunity you can give your child. But the two of you educators, are not the only teachers your youngsters have in this complex world. School happens everywhere and in everything the child sees, hears, does and senses. Serious business, schooling. Serious world, they meet.

What the Dickens?

It's Labour Day and a day that should be one causing us to think of workers. I haven't been in the work market for a long time, but all around me I see and hear tales about the working world. I speak to two married parents who carry a huge load of debt. Both university trained parents work, not for frills, but to survive. Hope of paying off the mortgage are unlikely and sending their children to university at the outrageous future costs of that, is something they don't want to think about. Month to month, they can just get by trying to live an average life. Saving extra money for a glorious retirement isn't possible. If their jobs didn't have benefits such as medical, dental and pension plans, only emergency care would be possible. Maybe their nice house and cars make them appear "rich" to some but they aren't. No one sees the two at the dining room table monthly, trying to figure out how to have a holiday away or buy the kid's bike or dance lessons or the fashion runners. Theirs is a success story, however. Down the way, in a rental, lives another family. They just learned that Dad who is bordering fifty doesn't have a job and at his age, is unlikely to find one. His company "went under". The choices are, that he goes to work up North or tries for a starter wage job in town. Starter wage is what teens make who live at home and drive mom's car. But what other choice is there, when the grocery bill alone is scary? The chief wage earner is now mom who goes to work on the bus. She worries about rent and groceries. At the moment, they are slowly sinking further and further into debt. Their teens who work after school and weekends, complain that their "friends" have all kinds of things they do not, and that it affects their social standing at school. They ask "how come?" even though they know "how come". The family sits at the kitchen table wondering what to do. There are no answers other than a job, and soon. In a tiny house on the corner, there is a widower whose neglected place needs a roof. he can't afford a "home". His only choice is to sell but he owes huge back taxes and penalties.  He has a government pension and that's it. He was a house painter and while he worked which was rarely, since people in his neighbourhood couldn't afford to hire one, he tried to save what he could, but it simply didn't meet what he needs now. He sits in front of his old TV trying to think if he can afford tuna fish and macaroni, or just macaroni this month when the pension comes in. He's lost track of taxes and insurance. Those are luxuries he can't afford if he wants to pay his hydro bill and cable. He gave up his car a long time ago. His family lives far away and when they call, he tries to put a smile in his voice but he is lonely and when he doesn't feel well and sees the doctor, he is always happy to know he isn't sick. He can't afford to be sick. What I write, Dickens did in story form and did it well enough to make a difference. Not any more.  

Perfectly Infallible

No human is infallible. That is a fact. If it is a fact, why then, do some people believe they are? You and I have experienced this sort of being and pondered the fact that such a false concept is possible. A friend of mine, a Grade One teacher, if you please, told me one day, that before she retired, she was a perfect teacher with a perfect program. When I questioned her further, she told me why and how she was perfect. What I concluded, was that she was perfect in her own eyes because she fit perfectly into her own program. While it may be possible for someone to say they are infallible, it  is just not true. Perfection has its own limiting forces and according to these, something can fit into the criteria perfectly. Infallibility is yet another thing. It means never making a mistake. Even perfectionists will admit to becoming perfect, by learning from their mistakes, however few there may be. Those who think they are infallible, make their first mistake by thinking they are. Simple logic. And of course, logic is never simple. But we have certain factions in our society that do purport to being infallible. We've all met them as bosses or professionals of some sort. Sad to say that most medical doctors are considered to be infallible. For some odd reason, perhaps fear, we allow this fallacy. Doctors will tell you, other than in their offices, that, indeed, they are human and make mistakes sometimes. Professionally, however, medical doctors or their associates will deny mistakes. I know someone who picked up a prescription in which the doctor, according to the dosage listed, made a minor error. Neither the protective pharmacist nor the doctor's reception desk admitted that it was clearly a mistake, They turned the matter around and said that the elder patient was "confused" and that the dosage entered, was so, because  the patient wanted that change. On investigating, I found that the patient did so, but only because the doctor spent some time outlining why a 1.25 rather than .3 mm of a dosage would be less, and therefore, better for him. The elder said it didn't sound "right", but doctors"don't make mistakes". We all know the difference between 1.25 and .3 and which is less or more. The doctor did call and apologise later, which is rare and praiseworthy. I wish they were all as laudable.  But, in truth, it is the wisdom of aging that permits acceptance of this sort of incident without dispute. Elders feel vulnerable. A younger person would raise the roof if such a prescription error occurred. Wisdom understands, however, that while infallibility is just not possible in this world, and that doctors are, regardless of their education and experience, just as subject to error as the rest of us, elders know that tolerance is the better route to take.