I’ll start with the Peace Corps. It’s partly why I went to Egypt. I was sure I wanted to work in the Middle East, and I wanted to start with the Coptic Christians who literally live in garbage, the “Zabaleen” (and yes, I’m using the word “literally” correctly in this case). While the Coptic Christians’ cause has gained more spotlight these days, I saw the people in this community acting for their own good. I eventually saw that, by volunteering in this community, I was hurting them because I asked for cab fare to go to and from Moqattam. Don’t get me wrong: I loved volunteering there, and I learned so much about the community, and I love sharing what I know with others, but ultimately it was wrong for me to ask to be paid to sit in a nursery with kids for a few hours every Friday.

I also studied human rights law and wrote a research paper about how the media affected Female Genital Mutilation legislation in Egypt. Before leaving for Cairo, FGM had been “my issue” (so to speak) since high school. If you don’t know anything about it, I suggest you take 5 minutes to read the quick summary at the top of the page on Wikipedia. I had always thought that opposition to FGM came from Western culture, and that it wasn’t entirely fair for us to tell cultures what they can and cannot do. All we can do is educate them and hope they make a healthy decision. But in my research, I found that there was an active coalition formed by Egyptian women to fight FGM and to change the minds of their own people. Why? Because regardless of culture, cutting up female genitalia to prevent them from enjoying sex is wrong. So who the fuck am I to tell another culture how to approach an issue that doesn’t really exist in my culture?

Amongst the many things I learned not only about human rights but also about myself was this: I have no reason to go half-way around the world when there are enough problems in my own communities. That was my realization about the Peace Corps. I realized I don’t want to go through another organization that will assign me to a country to do something teach people a skill that people in their own country could probably teach as well.

Which brings me to a slight tangent about teaching English in other countries. That was the next thing I considered after leaving Egypt: I could teach English in another country (preferably Cambodia or Vietnam). I can speak English pretty well, so I can probably teach it, right? Wrong. Through a program, I could take a crash course on how to teach English, stay in that country for a few months, get paid, and then be on my merry way, but why? I’m not a teacher.

Which brings me now to Teach for America. From what I gather, urban/lower income education suffers partly because young, idealistic, inexperienced teachers want to work in these districts, and then after a couple years, they’re burnt out and move on. Doesn’t TFA perpetuate this behavior? It offers recent college grads to teach in low income area schools for a couple years, so that they can earn some money and take time to apply to graduate school. There’s a chance that people who participate in Teach for America intend to be teachers, but from what I’ve gathered about the people I know, very few of them plan to be teachers in the long run.

My second beef, which is a point a friend of mine made to me, is that the system is already a mess, so how can TFA participants possibly improve it? If you’re teaching Algebra II, and your students don’t understand basic fractions, what are you supposed to do? Are you going to flunk your students to make sure they catch up to the speed they should be at? Or are you going to play into the system that the rest of the school has set up and help them as much as you can, but pass them in the end? Are you strong enough to tell your students that they aren’t smart enough to pass your class and need to work harder?

I remember hearing that students in my old school district graduated, went to public universities, but then a decent percentage had to drop out and attend community college in order to catch up to the proper math and reading levels. Granted, this was just talk as I was growing up, but are you going to tell me I’m wrong? Because a student can take the high school exit exam at least 8 times before graduating. 8 fucking times to take a high school exit exam that supposedly a sophomore in high school can pass. And if the student repeatedly passes, there are still other options for the student to succeed. I can go into how much of a giant, sand-filled vagina the California state government is, but that’s for another time.

My point about TFA is this: if you’re going to invest time in teaching, then be a teacher. If you want to dick around for a couple years before going to graduate school, then get a job or an internship related to your field. I will give you a great example while also praising a good friend of mine. My friend graduated with a degree in psychology, which we all know is one of the top 5 majors of college students these days. She found a job as a teacher’s assistant at a school back in the Bay Area. She pays to attend classes on new teaching skills. (From what I understand, she pays out of pocket – the school doesn’t pay for it.) This is her second year teaching. She is saving money to go to graduate school to study children’s psychology, and intends to continue teaching.

My friend isn’t dicking around. She teaches now and intends to go to graduate school because in the long run, she wants to be a teacher. I mean, really, it’s not just that she wants to be a teacher, she is a teacher. She doesn’t follow any sort of cultish methodology, or intend to study anything unrelated to teaching. Teaching should be taken seriously, and not as a past-time for 20-somethings. (And as a 20-something, I hate feeling like my generation doesn’t work hard enough to make the world a better place.)

In the big picture, any sort of work that involves the betterment of humanity should always be taken seriously. If you want to teach, then be a teacher. If you want to make the world a better place, start small – you don’t need to go half-way around the world.

Seriously: the show focuses on the military that is in charge of defending the remainder of humanity and leading them all to salvation. If this isn’t a reflection of the military-industrial complex, I’m not sure what is. The president of the colonies smokes weed with the admiral for frak’s sake. Not only does the president smoke weed, but she also takes hallucinogens and is a religious nutcase. And at one point, the admiral tries to take down the president, only to finally frak her three seasons later. And the renown scientist is batshit crazy and leads a cult of naive women who believe in the one true god. Sounds like some red state bullshit to me.

In season 2, a crazed group of toaster-hugging hippies/terrorists call upon Galactica for peace with the cylons. A few episodes later, another group of crazed toaster-toasting hippies/radicals/terrorists want Galactica to destroy the cylon prisoner for what the toasters have done to the human race. And Galactica butts heads with both of them. Ultimately, Galactica’s role is this: don’t fuck with me.

Actually, that’s Admiral Adama’s role, one of the most beloved characters in science fiction (I would say). I don’t think there’s a single person who enjoys BSG who would dare speak poorly of EJO. (Or according to Barney Stinson, Jacob James Olmos.) He’s the head of the military of the remaining < 50,000 souls of humanity. He pretty much does whatever he wants, and while the colonies and the president like to think they can have some influence or control over him, he breaks a lot of rules, and lets his men and women break the rules as well. He removes the legal president of the colonies from office at the end of season 1. He constantly promotes and demotes his son. He fights the (almost) equally beloved Chief Tyrol on labor rights in season 4.

As an audience, we become so deeply involved with Adama and the people on Galactica that we can’t help but reflect on our own military. We consider the demands and criticisms we have of them. Granted, the U.S. military isn’t defending us from a toaster race that we created, nor is it defending the last 50,000 humans in the universe. But we have to imagine that our military is under similar pressures that Galactica is.

Think about the documentary Number Three/D’Anna makes. It captured some really ugly things about life on Galactica, but Adama loves it because it is what it is. And Number Three makes a great point: no one has left Galactica since volunteering to come aboard. Would you volunteer to fly vipers for Galactica? To die at the hands of cylons defending a race of beings that may or may not deserve to survive? The U.S. military has been entirely voluntary since the 1980s – can you believe we still have the most powerful military in the world? All other factors aside, I think it’s pretty frakking amazing that enough people even want to serve in the military.

BSG in no shape or form glorifies military life. It does not create perfect characters. It does not dignify war. Battlestar Galactica is about so much more than just the military. It’s about what it means to be human. A broad statement, I know, but to answer my original question: yes, it is absolutely possible for a true hippie to enjoy Battlestar Galactica. It may actually be truly enjoyable to hippies only. Why? Because the United Nations believed Battlestar Galactica was so important that they invited EJO, Mary McDonnell, and others to speak at the UN. (He totally “So Say We All”ed the UN.) What other fictional show paints humanity in a more realistic form?

Battlestar Galactica is the key to world peace. End. Of. Story.

My man thing says that I am still a reflection on him because he associates with me. You know who else he “associates” with? The crowd at a Sublime with Rome concert, i.e. a bunch of drunk pot-smoking hippies. And he listens to 103.1 The Buzz, a radio station in South Florida that holds an annual Bake Sale concert, another magnet for drunk pot-smoking hippies. (and THAT’S brought to you by the Marines.) He certainly hasn’t been reprimanded for associating with such a culture, so what does it matter if I act like a drunk pot-smoking hippie? Has it reflected on his career that I march in parades in crazy outfits with a bevy of baton twirling beauties called Turnin’ TriXXX? The answer is no.

To take it one step further, since I’m still a civilian, am I not allowed to exercise my right to protest? And simply as a citizen of this country, is it not my right to voice my opinion? Why should my opinion and word reflect on him? Shouldn’t his career be dependent on his own merit? It wouldn’t be that way if he worked for a civilian business. Sure, a military job isn’t the same as a civilian job, but if the military is supposed to be the best of the best of the fucking best, then why should their careers be influenced by civilians and their opinions? What does it matter? If my partner and his boss really like pasta alfredo, and I really don’t like it, why should that affect his promotion?

A silly example maybe, but that’s really how I feel about it. My opinion about a war, international relations, or a battalion ball does not reflect on my partner’s ability to be a great soldier. My manfriend and I have differing opinions on a lot of things, but I think that’s what makes us an awesome, super kick-ass couple. I was throwing a fit about this battalion ball coming up because it sounds sad and lame, and he said that, if we were married, and I joined some planning committee, that I could plan the ball however I wanted. Really? Does anyone truly believe that the military would let me plan a battalion ball the way I want it planned? Of course not. They have their rules and regulations, which do not include a required theme for a battalion ball. No theme = sad, lame dance.

I recently finished the book Uncle Sam’s Brides, which was written by two military wives in 1990. For my project it was great because it has all the information I need for hard data on certain claims (i.e. that military families live on food stamps). The only problem is that it was written 20 years ago. If anyone knows anyone who is working on a research paper, thesis, or study regarding lesser-known facts about military families I’d really appreciate it. I know there’s a lot of information about the suicide rates in the military, and while it’s a significantly larger problem than many give it credit, it is a more well-known fact.

Ultimately, I want to see more done on the matter of what it means to be a partner of someone in the military, i.e. I want to see more people write books about it. I read people’s stories on LeftFace, I read all kinds of articles via Google Alerts (too many to link), I talk to family and friends who are/have been military spouses, and it certainly hasn’t convinced me that marrying into the military lifestyle is right for me.

I feel Uncle Sam’s Brides was a great, comprehensive look at what milspouse life was like in 1990. If I can hopefully get started on my project soon, then maybe my book will be the next body of work that will bridge the gap between civilians and military, and maybe I’ll be able to answer my own questions about what military life means to me.

So I won’t go into the whole rant yet again, but I just thought I’d share:

There you have it. Occupy wall street is finally asking you to do something productive to fight the corporatocracy. Not that other folks have been saying this all along, but I guess it’s good publicity for Move Your Money. And check this out:

They ask you to do it AGAIN! Wow. Amazing. They finally care about fighting the fucking corporatocracy by using their money! I now feel this is a movement I can support.

Let me take a tiny step back. Yesterday I was listening to Sean Hannity (my co-worker’s default radio station on the drive home). He interviewed a young lady (Zuni I believe her name was?) who made some decent arguments about the corporatocracy and what people should do. I pretty much agreed with everything she said, but then he asked her why or how the corporations should be punished. She didn’t have much of a response. It would have been the perfect moment to talk about the link between modern slavery and American corporations.

This, again, goes back to what I’ve been saying, what Kevin Bales says in Disposable People, and E. Benjamin Skinner in A Crime So Monstrous: fight with your dollar. Zuni did mention this strategy, but didn’t stress it as much as it should’ve been. The example she used was MacDonald’s. True, MacDonald’s is not good for you and it would be ideal for people to stop supporting it; however, what Hannity wanted to point out was that MacDonald’s fulfills a desire the American people want. So ultimately the solution to the MacDonald’s problem isn’t that we should tax it more. We should curb the desire to eat their products.

The same goes for the perpetuation of modern slavery. Corporations like The Gap and IKEA fill a void in our lives for affordable, decent quality clothing and furniture. You can’t simply yell at the government and corporations for paying below minimum wage overseas if you continue to support these businesses. And maybe every single person occupying Wall Street doesn’t own clothing from The Gap/Old Navy or furniture from IKEA. It’s entirely possible, but very unlikely. We’ve accepted the products of modern slavery as essential to our everyday lives. Even our food. Even some food harvested in our own country is done by modern slaves.

I’m sure the people on Wall Street and in Woodruff Park all agree with my points, but are they ready to act on them?

Update 4:51pm: just saw that the Occupiers in Atlanta have marched to Bank of America in Midtown. So…you make the effort to get to the building, just so you can yell at it? Can’t you all simply walk inside and take your money out?! Can’t you actually do something to end the “greed”?!

First, I want to post an image of what the latest headlines are for BBC (the international news source I respect and go to):

oh look! Kim Jong-Il's grandson has a Facebook! That's big news.

I scrolled down a little just to make sure:

Do you see Wall Street protests anywhere in there? In case you can’t read the screenshot, the answer is no. They’re somewhere on the website, yes, but it’s certainly not as newsworthy as, say, the protests in Syria or apparently the announcement of the iPhone 5. (This, I’m sure, is another reason OWS is against the corporatocracy, which they all tweet on their iPhones.) Nowhere on the website says what they want to achieve, no goals listed, no demands. There are some supporters who have suggested demands, but the organization will not ask for anything. If you have no end goal, then what the fuck are you doing?

Before I really get started, I wanted to address the idea that this is has been compared to the events taking place in the Middle East, specifically Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt. Sure, if you really want to make the argument, our democracy has become a bit of a corporatocracy. But do you know what was going on in Egypt? Mubarak had been in power for 30 years, assuming power after Sadat was assassinated. The disparity between the rich 1% in Egypt versus the other 99% is that the 99% in Egypt lives on less than the 99% here in the US. Up until January 25, people were afraid to say anything against Mubarak and the government. Here we constantly hear, see, and read a variety of opinions about our government on every media platform possible. And haven’t you noticed that there’s been absolutely no media allowed to cover the Syrian protests for months? Do not compare the occupation of Wall street to the revolutions in the Middle East.

My first suggestion: take all your money out of the major banks – Bank of America, Chase, Wells Fargo – and invest with smaller community banks and credit unions. How many people “occupying” these cities have accounts with these banks? You really want to bring down the corporatocracy? Stop feeding it money. In case you haven’t noticed, this is something I’ve been preaching for a very, very long time. I’ll address you more directly: Dear Occupy Wall Street, please march to the nearest BofA, Chase, and/or Wells Fargo, and have everyone close their accounts with these banks.

Also, why is it that they’re so willing to accept donated food? If the occupiers want to fight the system, why not buy food from smaller restaurants in the area? Even from NYC chains? Why ask people to buy you food and send it to you? Most likely people will buy you cheap food, which is processed by the big chains. And furthermore, why aren’t you personally stimulating the economy? If you want to change the system, why not do it with your dollar? Clearly you do not understand the language of corporatocracy.

I think one of the best illustrations of what I’m trying to tell you is this documentary Beer Wars. 95% of the beer industry is dominated by the 3 major corporations: Coors, Miller, and Anheuser-Busch. Even the precious “working class” Pabst Blue Ribbon is owned by Miller. The film is all about being an informed consumer. So what are you doing on Wall street? Are you telling people how to invest their money? Are you informing them of the power of their dollar? No. You’re camping out on the streets and not contributing to the economy.

Do something productive, or is that too square for you?

UPDATE 10/5/11: I’ve been proven wrong. BBC thinks that the Wall Street march is almost as important as Steve Jobs’s death.

there it is.

My manfriend has to do the stupidest things, like stay awake for 24 hours to do nothing and then go straight into work. The day before 4th of July weekend he had to run a poorly planned ridiculous obstacle course for 6 hours with no food or water. If there’s ever another debt ceiling debate that goes on too long, he has to work without pay because he’s considered “essential.” I agree that things like this, yes, you can absolutely be angry about and things that shouldn’t happen. But as I’ve said to him, did you seriously not expect this absurd bullshit from the military? No, it’s not “what you signed up for,” but was it not expected with the territory?

To me, this is different from the hardships that aren’t outlined in the job descriptions or the common-knowledge adversities (at least, what I would consider “common knowledge”). When military partners and families struggle with the emotional impact of deployment, of moving from place to place, of isolation from the rest of the population…no. No one signs up for these things. But from what I can see, the military blogging community tells similar stories to each other, and although it’s on the internet for everyone to see, no one’s looking for it.

And this is why I desperately want (need?) to start my photography project. I’m not very experienced with the military lifestyle, but I also wouldn’t consider myself a typical civilian either. I feel very in between the worlds, and so I believe that I am in the position to bring both worlds together. Not that I’m going to single-handedly bridge the ginormous gap, but I believe I can contribute to it in a way few people can or will.

Anyway, maybe I’ll include some of this in my grant proposals. But first, I have to make some work. That’s the worst part about all this: I can’t ask for money until I’ve gotten started on the project, but I can’t really start the project until I have money. Oh, the vicious cycles of applying for grants and loans…

When I was younger, it seemed obvious to me that I learned right from wrong from my parents. I mean, doesn’t everyone? But as I got older and people continued to ask me these questions, I became much more defensive about it. I find it incredibly ignorant and offensive that people don’t think I can be a good person because I don’t have religion in my life. I also think it’s sad that that’s what people are taught by their churches – that only good people have faith.

I’ve been reading Jimmy Carter’s Our Endangered Values: America’s Moral Crisis, which is about how the fundamentalist right-wing Christians have gained influence over the past two decades in the Republican party. I didn’t know this, but he is (was?) a member of the Southern Baptist Church, and even though he is a devout Christian, he was still able to separate any personal conflicts and beliefs from what was best for the country (ex: Roe v. Wade).

As I read his book, it surprises me every once in a while how important it is to him that people embrace the teachings of Jesus Christ. He’s not waging a war on everyone who isn’t Christian, nor is he fervently trying to convert his reader. It’s just how he feels as a devout Christian, and it’s not the kind of book I’ve ever chosen to read before. His arguments, however, are exactly what I agree with. I just finished the chapter about women’s roles in the church, and how Jesus believed that men and women should worship God as equals; however, the men in charge of the church are misogynists and demote women’s positions in the church, family, and professional worlds.

While Jimmy Carter seems to base his morals on the teachings of Jesus Christ, I feel like he wouldn’t judge me for not having religion. And I hope that more and more faithful people can understand this. We don’t need religion to be good people. It has no place in government (which Jimmy Carter also believes), especially in a country that was created based on religious freedom, not just the freedom of different sects of Christianity.

Yes, it would be really great to have health care and benefits and all that jazz. But I made a conscious decision five years ago not to join the army. I have no interest in following their rules. For example, my manfriend tells me anyone associated with the military is not allowed to yell at a civilian, regardless of how stupid they are or how much they yell back. That seems ridiculous to me. Why would I surrender my right to raise my voice at whomever I want? And I don’t want to worry about how my actions affect his reputation and his career. If I want to dress up and be crazy and get drunk and take my clothes off and take pictures, it shouldn’t show any reflection on my manfriend. It’s not his job to tame me or keep me under control or make sure I’m obedient. I should be allowed to be my own person.

And I know that military partners like my friend and my aunt and the ladies at Left Face feel the same way, and it seems they have no problems hiding how they feel or being who they are. The only difference between me and them is that I’m not married. In some ways, reading what they write comes off as more legitimate because, according to the military, their partners are legally obligated to these women. Their words have more weight in their relationships. But what about those of us who choose not to be married, but still suffer the same way? Is our love any less valuable? (Just a reminder: marriage doesn’t always equal love.) And what about those who are married, but are not recognized by the government?

As a final note, I highly recommend you watch In Their Boots: Second Battle. My story is obviously not the same as theirs, but it’s a somewhat similar struggle: how do we function as a military partner if the military won’t acknowledge we exist?