I've been reading again. This time it's "American History- a very short introduction", same series as the WWI book. I guess it's an appropriate read since we'll celebrate our nation's formation later this week. It really give you some perspective on things when they condense American history, from pre-Colombian Native Americans to the current decade, into 130 pages of a book about the size of my hand. The actual fighting portion of the Civil War was recounted in about 2 pages. And this is a mini history of a country that's only less than 250 years old. Imagine the slightness of events viewed in the context of all of history. It's pretty impressive to consider how young our country still is in the history of the world.
However, the thought that got me up and writing wasn't a patriotic one. As I read a few lines on women abolitionists, who also took up the women's rights movement, and experience from yesterday came back to me. Story:
I was asked a few weeks ago to speak in sacrament meeting yesterday. I enjoy speaking in church and accepted the invite. I prepared in my usual manner of studying as much about the subject in as many different directions as I can then after letting it all sit for a couple days I'll come back and compose some sort of general outline with what the goal of the talk is. This allows me to be able to adjust easily to the actual amount of time I have to speak- because it's never the 12 minutes they ask you to prepare for. Well, as it turns out there were to be 3 speakers yesterday, myself and another girl and a guy. After talking to the guy before Sunday school Brother Strong, who would be conducting the meeting, came over and asked me if I'd be ok as the last speaker. Sure, no prob. Then he continued "Yeah, I just spoke to [whatever his name was] and he said his talk is about 8 minutes. I usually have the guy go last so he can accordion his talk to fit the remaining time, but it doesn't look like that would work in this case." I said I would be glad to be last and accordion my talk as needed. What went through my head was a sarcastic "Yeah, cuz a guy is better at speaking/adjusting length so he goes last..." not that I was terribly offended by this perceived slightly sexist comment- the thought just rolled through my head and gave me a good laugh at poor Bro. Strong's subconscious "blunder". The reason I think it caught my ire is because I consider speaking and teaching to be one of my better natural abilities. So while he didn't mean it as such I initially reacted to it as a jab at my abilities as a orator. I spoke last, for about 25 minutes. (The other two talks probably averaged a length of 7 minutes.) But that's another story.
Later I was telling this story to my oldest sister (who interestingly enough is probably one of the only people who will actually read this. Hi Slick!) to which she countered by pointing out that the guy would go last traditionally as a sign of respect for the women. The women could deliver their discourse as planned without concern of time and then the poor guy at the end would have to find more to say or cut out everything he wanted to say to accommodate the time left in the meeting. By George- this makes perfect sense. I was caught. I had no response. I can't remember actually saying anything- and it was probably pretty weak if I did- for the rest of that part of the conversation. She continued to point out that many things that used to be a sign of respect are now perceived as slights against women because that's not how they want to be respected anymore- they wanted to be treated as equals.
So, as I was reading about abolitionists who picked up the cause of women's rights because their marginalization by the men at the time I thought back to this event yesterday. You know what I realize? I'd been sucked in by the modern feminist movement. gack! If someone were to ask me if I consider myself a feminist I would say that I am, but not a modern feminist. I believe in the power of women, and that they should be respected and have equal rights with men- but that doesn't mean we have to be the same as men or become like men. I just think we should be able to do whatever work call to us and be fairly treated in it. I also think that includes the choice to stay at home as a mother, and that we should not be derided for that choice by those who choose another path. Sometime I sit and shake my head at the "crazy feminist ladies" in the news and the media. I think though my sister was probably internally shaking her head at her poor little sister who had gone astray down the path of crazy feminist lady. (I could be wrong, but it makes the point, so just run with it.) I had automatically assumed the worst about the comment made by a man who I know is very respectful to women and who's wife is a wonderful, capable, strong lady. I'd stepped onto the dark side.
I think my sister's comment is an interesting point though. She said that women don't want to be respected by being treated special, but want to be treated equally. I think it's just that the idea of respect has changed. We want to be respected, not babied. We want to be recognized as people with brains and stuff. I know I don't mind letting a kind gentleman carry my groceries for me if 1. I actually do need help, or 2. I know that he respects me as a capable person and not as useless girl. (Tip to boys: Instead of saying "You got that ok?", "Need help?" or other things that imply that she doesn't have it ok, try "I'd like to help you with that if I may." It's way easier to say yes to.) I think that's the reason a lot of women shy away from conventional forms of men showing respect to women is because we are talented, capable, independent people- and we don't like feeling like someone thinks we're not. Call it pride if you will, but I think sometimes it's ok to have some pride in who you are. So my reception to a gesture of respect will largely depend on my confidence in my nature as a strong woman. I am a strong woman, therefore I can let a guy lug my luggage up the stairs for me, even though I could do it myself, because I know he's just trying to be kind and respectful. I can let him open a door, walk me to the car, or even speak last in church because I know that it doesn't change who I am.
So basically for your average daily interactions:
Dear Guys: Be respectful, not patronizing. We can tell the difference.
Dear Women: It's ok. You are a capable person. You know you are- now, let the guys be nice.
Monday, June 30, 2014
Friday, June 13, 2014
Acupuncture and Networking
Today I had flaming needles sticking out of my back.
Yep.
I've been to a chiropractor a few times, for neck issues at first but adding in knee and wrist more recently. It just so happens that my chiropractor also does acupuncture. I don't know that I really believe in it or not, but it's not going to do me any harm either so I just go with it. It's a unique experience. Most of the time you don't even feel any pain as they go in, just a little poke. Then once it's in you don't really feel it, you just know it's there- sticking out of you. They'll play some nice Enya or something and you just get to chill for a few minutes then they come and pluck them all out and that's it. Today I had my neck, knees, and wrists all adjusted. After the adjustments my chiropractor lead me, not to the usual room for some acupuncture, but down the hall to another hall with 2 rooms in it. In one is a guy with a smouldering ball of something on a pin sticking out of his shoulder. Into the other one I go and am peppered with pins- I've never felt so much like a pin cushion in my life. Then comes the sound of the match and the smell of smoke. I couldn't tell any difference, but it's something else I can say I've done. When the nurse came back and plucked out my pins she forgot the ones in my wrist, so I got to see those as I asked her to take them out. It's a strange sight to have big silver pins sticking out of your hand.
As I was sitting there contemplating the strange thing that was going on I decided to write this post, and I just planned on writing what I did above- but then I though another interesting thing- I never would have sought out a chiropractor who did acupuncture. In fact I'm pretty sure I would have avoided it when chiropractor shopping. How did I end up here? Networking. My chiropractor is the father of an acquaintance from a few years ago. It made picking a chiropractor pretty easy. I don't know that I even would've started going to a chiropractor had I not known this guy. This got me thinking about the other things I've tried because of someone I knew- rock climbing, sushi, grad school... Yep- I probably wouldn't have done grad school in math if I hadn't gotten to know Dave as an undergrad. Before today I would always just think of networking as meeting people in hopes of getting a leg up on a job- but that's not really what it's about. Networking is all about meeting people who will help you try new things, get out and explore... Take chances! Make mistakes! Get messy! I can see now that as my set of friends and acquaintances stagnates so does my exposure to new experiences. I guess it's time to get out an meeting new people.
Yep.
I've been to a chiropractor a few times, for neck issues at first but adding in knee and wrist more recently. It just so happens that my chiropractor also does acupuncture. I don't know that I really believe in it or not, but it's not going to do me any harm either so I just go with it. It's a unique experience. Most of the time you don't even feel any pain as they go in, just a little poke. Then once it's in you don't really feel it, you just know it's there- sticking out of you. They'll play some nice Enya or something and you just get to chill for a few minutes then they come and pluck them all out and that's it. Today I had my neck, knees, and wrists all adjusted. After the adjustments my chiropractor lead me, not to the usual room for some acupuncture, but down the hall to another hall with 2 rooms in it. In one is a guy with a smouldering ball of something on a pin sticking out of his shoulder. Into the other one I go and am peppered with pins- I've never felt so much like a pin cushion in my life. Then comes the sound of the match and the smell of smoke. I couldn't tell any difference, but it's something else I can say I've done. When the nurse came back and plucked out my pins she forgot the ones in my wrist, so I got to see those as I asked her to take them out. It's a strange sight to have big silver pins sticking out of your hand.
As I was sitting there contemplating the strange thing that was going on I decided to write this post, and I just planned on writing what I did above- but then I though another interesting thing- I never would have sought out a chiropractor who did acupuncture. In fact I'm pretty sure I would have avoided it when chiropractor shopping. How did I end up here? Networking. My chiropractor is the father of an acquaintance from a few years ago. It made picking a chiropractor pretty easy. I don't know that I even would've started going to a chiropractor had I not known this guy. This got me thinking about the other things I've tried because of someone I knew- rock climbing, sushi, grad school... Yep- I probably wouldn't have done grad school in math if I hadn't gotten to know Dave as an undergrad. Before today I would always just think of networking as meeting people in hopes of getting a leg up on a job- but that's not really what it's about. Networking is all about meeting people who will help you try new things, get out and explore... Take chances! Make mistakes! Get messy! I can see now that as my set of friends and acquaintances stagnates so does my exposure to new experiences. I guess it's time to get out an meeting new people.
Monday, June 9, 2014
A century later...
I'm amazed, looking back at my education to this point, at how much I have not learned. I have done pretty well in school, yet somehow seem to have not actually learned a lot about many things I supposedly knew enough about to get good grades in the classes about them. It's maybe a statement about the system, but I won't go there today. I would rather talk about The First World War.
I was at the library last week and became reacquainted with a book series called "(fill in the blank), A Very Short Introduction". They're just what they sound like. Ranging from 100-150 pages long and basically pocket sized they offer a quick start on a very wide assortment of subjects. Since I recently had been contemplating my astounding lack knowledge of history I selected a few of these I thought might be interesting. My first read was about WWI, which I thought appropriate since it is the 100th anniversary of the start of that war. Oh my. I was sucked in. By the end of it's 119 pages I was astounded by many things, one of which was how little I actually knew about WWI before reading this "Very Short Introduction". And most of what I did know I learned from a John Green youtube video...
Now, if you know a lot about WWI, this post probably won't be very interesting to you- except for you to laugh at my incredibly limited understanding of that war... Just a warning. If, like me, you never had an actual good study of this chunk of history, read on for some interesting tidbits.
What I "knew" about WWI:
-It happened in Europe. America joined in eventually.
-Trenches. Lots of trenches.
-Something about Flanders Field.
-Lots of people died.
-It started because of Germany, as it usually does.
-It had something to do with Franz Ferdinand and Serbs.
-France got invaded, as they always do.
Really, if you had quizzed me about WWI I wouldn't have done very well. Now some thoughts on things I learned from my brief study of the war-
-It didn't actually really start entirely with Germany. With the assassination of Franz Ferdinand the Austro-Hungarians saw an opportunity to go to war and Germany backed them. Germany got all the blame though because they kept fighting after everyone else in their alliance fell apart.
-It's startling how well Germany/Austria-Hungary did in the war. If they had stuck to their original plan of crushing France before rushing over to fight the hapless Russians, they probably would've won. As it was, even with their infighting and aspiring generals they still managed to outlast Russia and take (for a short time) everything stretching from Poland to Finland. Because of this and their eventual defeat all those countries were created along that strip- including the two aforementioned. The Austrians succeeded pretty much only because they were fighting groups even less competent then they were. In the end they just managed to out last the Russians socially and politically. The Germans, however, seemed to be the best fighters in the war. They were better organized, more prepared, and more innovative than the Allies. Again, it seems that if it weren't for the disunity in the military and political scene they would have dominated. As it was their focus shifted back and forth from one front to the other creating no progress on either until Russia imploded. By then, though, the war had gone on so long their own country was suffering and their other choices were to come back and bite them pretty hard.
-America hardly had anything to do with this war. It seems we just came in as the closers. We contributed much throughout the war in the way of trade and shipping, but we were essentially neutral, always calling for peace. Imagine if the blockade against Germany hadn't been so strong we probably would've been supplying them as well as the Allies. And I guess it makes sense. The causes of both sides of the fight had nothing really to do with anything the US cared about. Why should we pick a side? Neither side was entirely right or wrong as far as ethics go, so until Germany started sinking our ships why should we favor one side or the other? Nowadays we see Brittan as a natural ally, but that is because of this war and the one that followed. At the time they were still a competitor and the country we'd just fought 2 wars against. But, thanks to Germany sinking our ships and Allied propaganda eventually we did join the party- just in time to finish it. It seems the real value of the US joining the war was just that our soldiers were well fed, not battle weary, and numerous. They hadn't been hanging out in trenches for the past 4 years, and it showed. It seems the biggest victory of having the Americans was the crushing of the morale of the German soldiers. Heck, they were only actually involved in the war for a few months before the armistice. A tidal wave of fresh leg-ed boys dropped into the last mile of a marathon.
-Germany tried to get Mexico as an ally. That would've been something. They promised Mexico they could have Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona back. Ha. Can you imagine Mexico attacking the US? Can you imagine Mexico taking back Texas?
-The sides were not the same as they were in WWII, the war I somehow gleaned more knowledge of in school than I did of WWI. For some reason I assumed Germany always had the same friends. Actually, Japan, Italy, and Romania all fought against Germany the first time round. Also the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) was an ally of Germany too. I didn't even know they were involved in either of the World Wars.
-Spain and Portugal never participated militarily in either World War. And somehow Switzerland managed to stay neutral, despite being smack in the middle of the action. How did they ever manage that?
-France wasn't actually overrun by Germany. In fact, they never even got to Paris. Turns out the two world wars were actually different things...
-The sheer amount of destruction and loss of life is almost unbelievable. I guess it was just an awkward transition between the old ways of fighting wars and what was required with the advent of new technologies. Just so sad.
-I also was impressed at how WWI really set up WWII. Everything that happened at the end of the war paved the path for Hitler's rise to power and a nation of people who would support him. Also WWI brought in the Russian revolution and Communism. What a legacy.
Yeah, I learned a lot. It's an interesting thing to commemorate 100 years since the beginning of one of the deadliest and most destructive wars in history. 100 years ago the world changed forever. It doesn't even seem like there's very much of a silver lining to say "But at least..." I guess the main emotions I had at the end of the book was just awe at how lucky the Allies were to win (I mean, they were pretty impressively incompetent.) and how sad it is that it even happened in the first place. It changed everything, but accomplished nothing. So, a century later- what's the take away? I don't know. Anyway, I feel much enlightened and am looking forward to learning more as this centennial year goes on. It's good to remember.
I was at the library last week and became reacquainted with a book series called "(fill in the blank), A Very Short Introduction". They're just what they sound like. Ranging from 100-150 pages long and basically pocket sized they offer a quick start on a very wide assortment of subjects. Since I recently had been contemplating my astounding lack knowledge of history I selected a few of these I thought might be interesting. My first read was about WWI, which I thought appropriate since it is the 100th anniversary of the start of that war. Oh my. I was sucked in. By the end of it's 119 pages I was astounded by many things, one of which was how little I actually knew about WWI before reading this "Very Short Introduction". And most of what I did know I learned from a John Green youtube video...
Now, if you know a lot about WWI, this post probably won't be very interesting to you- except for you to laugh at my incredibly limited understanding of that war... Just a warning. If, like me, you never had an actual good study of this chunk of history, read on for some interesting tidbits.
What I "knew" about WWI:
-It happened in Europe. America joined in eventually.
-Trenches. Lots of trenches.
-Something about Flanders Field.
-Lots of people died.
-It started because of Germany, as it usually does.
-It had something to do with Franz Ferdinand and Serbs.
-France got invaded, as they always do.
Really, if you had quizzed me about WWI I wouldn't have done very well. Now some thoughts on things I learned from my brief study of the war-
-It didn't actually really start entirely with Germany. With the assassination of Franz Ferdinand the Austro-Hungarians saw an opportunity to go to war and Germany backed them. Germany got all the blame though because they kept fighting after everyone else in their alliance fell apart.
-It's startling how well Germany/Austria-Hungary did in the war. If they had stuck to their original plan of crushing France before rushing over to fight the hapless Russians, they probably would've won. As it was, even with their infighting and aspiring generals they still managed to outlast Russia and take (for a short time) everything stretching from Poland to Finland. Because of this and their eventual defeat all those countries were created along that strip- including the two aforementioned. The Austrians succeeded pretty much only because they were fighting groups even less competent then they were. In the end they just managed to out last the Russians socially and politically. The Germans, however, seemed to be the best fighters in the war. They were better organized, more prepared, and more innovative than the Allies. Again, it seems that if it weren't for the disunity in the military and political scene they would have dominated. As it was their focus shifted back and forth from one front to the other creating no progress on either until Russia imploded. By then, though, the war had gone on so long their own country was suffering and their other choices were to come back and bite them pretty hard.
-America hardly had anything to do with this war. It seems we just came in as the closers. We contributed much throughout the war in the way of trade and shipping, but we were essentially neutral, always calling for peace. Imagine if the blockade against Germany hadn't been so strong we probably would've been supplying them as well as the Allies. And I guess it makes sense. The causes of both sides of the fight had nothing really to do with anything the US cared about. Why should we pick a side? Neither side was entirely right or wrong as far as ethics go, so until Germany started sinking our ships why should we favor one side or the other? Nowadays we see Brittan as a natural ally, but that is because of this war and the one that followed. At the time they were still a competitor and the country we'd just fought 2 wars against. But, thanks to Germany sinking our ships and Allied propaganda eventually we did join the party- just in time to finish it. It seems the real value of the US joining the war was just that our soldiers were well fed, not battle weary, and numerous. They hadn't been hanging out in trenches for the past 4 years, and it showed. It seems the biggest victory of having the Americans was the crushing of the morale of the German soldiers. Heck, they were only actually involved in the war for a few months before the armistice. A tidal wave of fresh leg-ed boys dropped into the last mile of a marathon.
-Germany tried to get Mexico as an ally. That would've been something. They promised Mexico they could have Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona back. Ha. Can you imagine Mexico attacking the US? Can you imagine Mexico taking back Texas?
-The sides were not the same as they were in WWII, the war I somehow gleaned more knowledge of in school than I did of WWI. For some reason I assumed Germany always had the same friends. Actually, Japan, Italy, and Romania all fought against Germany the first time round. Also the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) was an ally of Germany too. I didn't even know they were involved in either of the World Wars.
-Spain and Portugal never participated militarily in either World War. And somehow Switzerland managed to stay neutral, despite being smack in the middle of the action. How did they ever manage that?
-France wasn't actually overrun by Germany. In fact, they never even got to Paris. Turns out the two world wars were actually different things...
-The sheer amount of destruction and loss of life is almost unbelievable. I guess it was just an awkward transition between the old ways of fighting wars and what was required with the advent of new technologies. Just so sad.
-I also was impressed at how WWI really set up WWII. Everything that happened at the end of the war paved the path for Hitler's rise to power and a nation of people who would support him. Also WWI brought in the Russian revolution and Communism. What a legacy.
Yeah, I learned a lot. It's an interesting thing to commemorate 100 years since the beginning of one of the deadliest and most destructive wars in history. 100 years ago the world changed forever. It doesn't even seem like there's very much of a silver lining to say "But at least..." I guess the main emotions I had at the end of the book was just awe at how lucky the Allies were to win (I mean, they were pretty impressively incompetent.) and how sad it is that it even happened in the first place. It changed everything, but accomplished nothing. So, a century later- what's the take away? I don't know. Anyway, I feel much enlightened and am looking forward to learning more as this centennial year goes on. It's good to remember.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)