reverse threading

the path back is the path forward

Tag Archives: oppression


by 1 Comment

where are they headed? [d.r. thursday]

the crane’s footprints left no doubt that it knew where it was headed. solid and in a straight line, looking deliberate and measured, directly across the trail’s walkway toward the pond, looking for life-affirming nutrition. it had found itself in illinois – perhaps by choice, perhaps by instinct. there was a mate’s footprints as well.

i read the other day that a school in wisconsin – waukesha, to be specific – has prohibited a class of elementary school first grade students from singing the song “rainbowland“. this song was a collaboration between miley cyrus and dolly parton. the superintendent stated that, “it was determined that ‘rainbowland’ could be perceived as controversial.” one of the teachers involved said she heard “through the grapevine” that the song was vetoed because of the artist miley cyrus. she asked, “how would you sing any song?” (if you concerned yourself with the potential of controversial past of any artist – or any person, for that matter.) dolly parton, back in 2017 when the song was released, said that the song is “really about if we could love one another a little better or be a little kinder, be a little sweeter, we could live in a rainbow land.” she added, “it’s really just about dreaming and hoping that we could all do better. it’s a good song for the times right now.” according to usa today, “the teacher says themes in ‘rainbowland’ are about embracing differences in each other” and the teacher presses on, it’s “like the core of what we teach at school or what anybody teaches.” but “rainbowland” and rainbow lanyards are both banned.

it is astounding that waukesha – a town where – horrifically – a person literally drove into a christmas parade themed “comfort and joy”, killed six people and injured sixty-two – would want to veto a song about diversity and acceptance and peace and kindness and making a difference – universal themes of positivity. i wonder how many of those little first graders may have known someone who was injured or killed – or watched the sheer horror from the parade sidelines. i wonder what their little zealous hearts and minds thought when they were told they couldn’t sing the song they had learned for their spring concert.

living in a rainbowland
the skies are blue and things are grand
wouldn’t it be nice to live in paradise
where we’re free to be exactly who we are
let’s all dig down deep inside
brush the judgment and fear aside
make wrong things right
and end the fight
’cause i promise ain’t nobody gonna win

living in a rainbowland
where you and i go hand in hand
oh, i’d be lying if i said this was fine
all the hurt and the hate going on here
we are rainbows, me and you
every color, every hue
let’s shine on through
together, we can start living in a rainbowland

(rainbowland – miley cyrus, dolly parton, oren yoel kleinman)

rainbowland was replaced by the rainbow connection from the muppet movie. but then, that song, too, was banned. after a bit of time, the rainbow connection was reinstated and is part of the concert. the muppets passed muster. but that roygbiv thing seems to be the item of contention for that school district. wow. and wow. headed backwards. the opposite of the cranes.

division and hatred and judgement and fear are worming their way throughout wisconsin, through all the gerrymandered lines.

there are those in this state that seem to know where they are headed. in a solid and straight line, deliberately and measured, their efforts are undermining freedoms of individuals, leading with discriminatory heavy hands and zilcho heart. their voices are everywhere, including in school boards and in school districts. their voices are silencing first graders.

a rainbowland this is not.

*****

shared fatherhood
shared fatherhood 2

contact DAVID about these shared fatherhood paintings

read DAVID’S thoughts this D.R. THURSDAY


by 1 Comment

standing and cheering with momma. [merely-a-thought monday]

i went to school for nineteen years. when i finished my master’s degree my sweet momma asked if i would – one day – work on a doctorate. i emphatically replied, “not a chance!”. i felt that i had reached my terminal degree, so to speak, and that all the rest – all that education, work experience, talent and intuition and tenacity and wisdom gained along the way – would serve me well.

i am 64 today. sixty-four. six decades plus four.

and i am a woman. woman. she/her/hers.

and this is the 21st century. the 2000’s.

yet, sitting on the couch the other day, watching new amsterdam – cast with actors in many female physicians’ and specialists’ roles – i stood up and cheered for the female character who firmly stated, “i didn’t go to school for twelve years [med school] to learn how to smile more.”

what – exactly – is the propensity for people to tell – specifically – women to “smile” or “smile more” or “just smile” or some similar iteration in answer to conflict, to agenda, to management riddled with prejudice? the question i ask – would you tell a man to “smile” or “smile more” or “just smile” or – truly – any iteration as such?

the continued thwarting, silencing, harassing of women is insidious. and forever. as in – forever.

“there is a pull, a fiercely ingrained pull, to mute a woman’s voice until it coos. to press it down until it is as small and sweet as a pastel after-dinner mint. to control it. to silence it.”

“and still, she speaks. she tries to be heard. but very—too often—her voice is ignored … or belittled, mocked, critiqued, or shouted down.”

“if a woman utilizes her voice in a powerful way, or shakes up systems that are firmly in place, she will be subject to an abysmal, hack, silencing-method known as punishment.” (fiona landers – we have always silenced women – damemagazine.com)

“learn how to smile more…” i put new amsterdam on pause and rolled my eyes.

smiling more and keeping silent…when is that appropriate action in one’s workplace? is it appropriate – palatable – with a minimal salary and no benefits? is it substantially more appropriate – indeed more palatable – with a substantial salary, full benefits and retirement? do leaps and bounds of higher financial reward translate to keeping-one’s-mouth-shut even in the face of maltreatment? is a silent smiler in the upwardly-mobile ranks helping those on the lower ladder rungs? where is the line (or is it a ladder rung?) between generative transparency and closed-lipped acquiescence? where is the respect?

my sweet momma – who died at almost 94, a woman before her time – was a smiler. i – like most people – love to smile. i can see her smile in mine, the thinning curve as she grins, the crinkling of her eyes and the crease just above her top lip. she was a promoter of joy and kindness and – as the basic tenets of all the work i do in the world – i would like to think i have brought those forward, from her.

i found a small pocket calendar she sent me. i had saved it in a drawer in my studio for fifteen years. there is a handwritten sticky note on the back in which she directs me to “read the motivations through these pages” and to “start with the cover”.

the cover quote reads, “you must be the change you wish to see in the world.” (mahatma gandhi)

smiling-on-demand – even being a “sweet pastel after-dinner mint” – does not get one anywhere. conversely, not smiling-on-demand, not being a “sweet pastel after-dinner mint” can get one destroyed. but, in fact, smiling-not-for-a-real-smile’s-sake and the act of being a “sweet pastel after-dinner mint” and staying quiet about any prejudicial wrongdoing or malfeasance is an abhorrent manipulation, a coercion, shutting down strong, smart, valuable women – employees – time after time. and for what purpose? is this not perpetuating the oppression? just what responsibility do we have to each other, to the next? are we the change or aren’t we?

i’m 64. i’m still standing and cheering.

so is my sweet momma.

and we’re both smiling, just not on demand.

*****

read DAVID’S thoughts this MERELY-A-THOUGHT MONDAY