Sometimes Early is good...

Hey peeps.

This week's been an interesting one, and probably will be something of a pivotal one when I look back on the  story of my life from the vantage point of the nursing home bed in a few years ...

I'm sat here writing at 0730 on a Monday and shortly heading up into Scotland for a medical appointment. I've been awake since 0430, since the big ball in sky woke me up ...

This coming week is gonna see the building of the deck for the new workshop/studio, the teacher training thing is happening in Sept and all in all things just seem to be going in a more or less positive direction.

Sure there are challenges and problems of course, but that's just part of life, which puts me in mind  of the following:

It's funny that I - a serious thinking sort - tend to remember a load of quotes from film's at specific times, yet the films are of course fantasy stories. Then again, what is a story but something someone writes about? Many of these  stories  speak to the human condition.

Your attitude to life writes your story whilst you live it. It does this whether you choose to pay attention or not, and at the end, if you didn't like the plot, well its a bit late at that point innit?

So, you have the  pen, and the day's page is still blank....what ya gonna write?

Laters

xSarahx

Back in the training Zone...

Hey,

Those that follow my other bloggings will know I'm into bike riding, a bit of running and am what people might call a lapsed fitness nut with middle aged spread.

For a variety of reasons I didn't train from Sept last year through till the beginnings of last week, save from a brief running spell at the start of this year.

This period of idleness resulted in significant weight gain, but also coincided with some developments regarding my medical transition...

So here's a subjective view from the inside of my head of what its like to train "with" and "with out" testosterone...

Training, tenacity and Other T's 

Ok, so throughout my first 40 odd years wherever I got into the physical training habit my biochemistry was that of the "typical" male. Testosterone as I'm sure you're all aware does a number of things, and is responsible for both bone density, & muscle mass, as well as the reproductive stuff.

Roughly 12 weeks ago I started on a inhibitor that essentially prevents my body from producing testosterone and recent blood tests indicate that my circulating T levels are equivalent to that of a natal female. (i.e. not a lot and considerably less than a male) This is in conjunction with a graduated introduction of Oestrogen, which has been on going almost a year, since to leave the body with neither of these hormones would be a "bad" thing..

Oddly, I've always experienced ups and downs in my motivation to train, simply because I like to be  fit and healthy but in the past I've always reached a point where my body image and physicality didn't match up..Dysphoria wreaking havoc with the results of the training and motivation dropping to zero. Thus throughout my life training has always been an episodic activity.

This means I know what its like to train having "gained weight", and been "fitter" in the past, I know how my body "usually" responds, fatigue levels etc

So what of now?

Well first off the main thing I'm noticing is a distinctly higher level of exertion for lower output. Notable changes being "light headedness" on resting at a level of work that previously wouldn't elicit this response. Perhaps this is a result of a reduction in testosterone and therefore its influence on the mechanisms of red blood cell production, and thus my bodies ability to carry oxygen to my tissues.

Of course we can't be sure without scientific testing, and this is purely subjective, but it's interesting none the less.

Out right power on the bike isn't really different yet.. that won't be noticeable until I retain my former levels of form and fitness. A peak power average for me was 220Watts, which aint exactly pro TdF level's but I'm currently sitting in 160 ranges which is on par with previous efforts at this fitness level.

Recovery: This is an odd one. I'm doing quite alot quite quickly. From being very sedentary to running every other day and one bike ride a week. I'm definitely tired, but "more" tired? Hard to say.

However here's where "motivation" raises its head. For the first time in my life the changes I'm seeing in the mirror and the "effects" of the training are not playing against my motivation but rather adding to it.

I'm no longer fighting ageing, or my own biochemistry.. and it's kinda cool. It means that I can just get on with the business of being healthy, and enjoy the runs without worrying about the times...which btw I used to do religiously.. (old army habit) or feeling that i'm not fast enough, or doing sufficient to stay slim enough blah blah blah.

Obviously this is all subjective and pretty much an initial thoughts kinda deal.. I've no definitives here, just idea's, musing and wonderings. Body positivity is a whole subject in and of itself. When I started riding bikes and running in my teen's & 20's it wasn't for anything other than "because it was fun" and because I liked the endorphin buzz. I ran because I liked it. I cycled because I liked it.

Then of course some stupid bugger decided it was a good idea to join HM forces and "fitness" became "work" with all those connotations.

It does go to show however that dysphoria and the resultant complications of living with it, can have  far reaching consequences into other areas of life that one might otherwise not expect.

As that "baggage" diminishes I am beginning to feel free-er than I ever have in years, un encumbered by the weight of this "disruptive mismatch"

Now, I i'm just "doing" stuff..

And that surely, can only be good thing.

Sarah

Emotional catharsis

Hello people of the world.

Throughout The week I've written part three of my Ethical mini series, but I can't post it yet cos I haven't written part two. In truth, part three wrote itself. I just kinda poured my thoughts into the keyboard and eh voila ... a blog article.

I then sat and watched a movie. Troy, with Brad Pitt playing the role of Achilles, Orlando bloom, and Eric Banna as his opposing Princes of Troy. Perhaps you've seen it? If not its worth look.

I took to it when it first came out, as it eloquently portrays the absurdity of the human condition, from greed & war, to love, desire, and immortality.

Indeed in it there is a line.. spoken by Achilles.

"We men are wretched things"

Very apt I thought. 

I've only recently begun reading about philosophy in the academic sense, but it would seem I've always had a philosophical approach in many ways. 

This week I've been looking after my daughter. A some times precocious 13 yr old with a good heart and steady head. She's developing an enquiring mind and still has that love of life imbued by her young years. It's a good start in many ways.

And yet......tomorrow we road trip back to her mums, 150 miles south of me, until the next school holidays or trip north. I find myself lamenting the distance. yet extraneous factors make it near impossible to remedy that presently.

Actually that's the hardest part of being "me". Living with the consequences of my actions, when viewing those consequences from the vantage point of their effect on others. I currently cannot provide for Rachel as I would like. I don't mean Mac books, and new phones or stuff from amazon although thats all very nice, and great in its own way. I mean by having a full fridge. By being able to replace her broken bed,  and by being able to do those unseen planning things that lead to availability of university opportunities, or mean that college fees are no barrier to academic goals and endeavour.

Why is this so? Well because I'm not currently employed financially, despite a CV as long as your arm and, if I may say so myself, a pretty decent work ethic. Of course I'm not alone in this, but every rebuttal, every unanswered email or ignored enquiry. Every botched interview because when I walk in people make judgements, is a continued disadvantage not just to me, but to the future aspiration of a 13 yr old girl who, frankly, didn't ask for this shit.

Yeah , ok. I'm fed up. Ya got me. Guilty as charged.

But where does all this soul searching get me? If reflection has a purpose it's to learn and grow.. not to wallow and moan. So where's the lesson and opportunity in this?

To be honest its unclear.. You see, there comes point where the results of our action are outside our control. I can, and will continue to apply, create opportunity, talk to people and, in as much as possible, believe the best of people. But it's not in my power to hire me into a job. That power rests with others, thus my efforts seem fruitless and devoid of control of any outcome.

I'm sure many of you will have seen this graph from the work of a Dr Karasek et al,

Anyone who finds themselves in box D, with high Demands and low control of outcome is in for a rough ride. The study was  done with reference to work based stress, however pretty much all those who are unemployed, and strive not to be, live in Box D permanently. 24 7. Its unpleasant after a protracted period.

So I guess the answer to my own internal questioning is actually a question. "How does one retake that control?" A few years back I rather belligerently said "if no fecker is gonna give me a job i'll bloody well create my own" Perhaps then self employment is the way. That's a hard road to travel and an even harder one to take to successful conclusion. Particularly when feeling beleaguered and distrustful of human nature. Self employment is an act of complete non cynical belief. A significant challenge for one such as myself at present.

Perhaps then it's time to widen the net. The north east is a pretty awful place for jobs, unless you're in specific industries. So why not look elsewhere?

I've a busy week coming up, with several long term projects coming to a close, and a few of those already mentioned opportunities to explore. Perhaps then it's the ideal time to reframe the question and ask not so much "what next?" as "where next?"

You remember that definition of insanity? Repeatedly doing the same thing whilst looking for different results?

Perhaps then it's time to change up the game. Not for my sake, but for that of a young woman's future.

And there's the lesson. It's not about me. I stopped being a priority early in the morning of the1st of October 2003, when I officially became "Dad" A title that I oddly still hold today despite the transition stuff, which is kinda an inside joke.

That moment, and all that goes with it, is hands down the best, and most scary outcome of life to date.

So, Where to next?

;-)

Gender month, Categorical thinking and a 3000 year old question.

Disclaimer.

This piece was originally written on behalf of the Queerness, to be posted this month. However, since some conversations with a few local trans people and emerging divergent views, it would appear to be the case that this publication route is no longer open to me via the individual who requested I write the peice.

I have written previously on the temptation of ardent proponents on one view or another to withdraw from debate on the basis of "indignation" and "principles" Yet as ever in doing so we damage the process of debate and discussion itself.

So here's a thought:

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.” 

― John Milton, Areopagitica

Edit. 4/4/2017.

Since writing the above, and posting this yesterday the individual concerned suggested that I have misrepresented the views of "the queerness" Fair comment. After all there is a team behind that particular publication. So perhaps on balance that was overstating the case here. It's not "the queerness" as a publication that is at fault. Merely one of its curators for putting personal opinion before open debate. A fact made abundantly clear by the fact that their Facebook page and twitter accounts were blocked to me long before this could be discussed via more appropriate means.

All this stemmed from a Facebook discussion of a recent India Willougby piece ... Sadly the  thread has  now been deleted .

By all means read the queerness, its usually rather informative and thought provoking. I mentioned the entire publication in an effort to keep this on an impersonal basis. Maybe that was somewhat naive, so, with no other recourse I must single out the individual responsible for condemnation. Gatekeeping of articles on the grounds of personal opinion and miss representation of the content therein is poor form. It was suggested that the article below, and by extension me,  are things the individual had no time for, since it was merely rehashing of the old women are men debate. Read it. I'll let you all decide.

So, here's the "dangerous" article make of it what you will and by all means, let me know.
__________________________________

Brexit, leavers, remainers, Britain, The EU, Gender, man, woman, sex, black, white, hispanic, Republican, Democrat, rich or poor.

I'm sure on reading the above various people will have rolled their eyes at least once and thought:

"Oh lord, not again!"

Humanity loves it's categories. Science thrives on them, learning, discovering and clarifiying collective wisdom on the basis of experiments, proofs and the categorising of it's results. Sadly there are also those who would use categories as a means for social and economic division.

Thinking and explaining outcomes by use of a system of categories is a useful tool, just think of the elements and periodic table for example, or behavioural studies of chimpanzee's. Even consumer product marketing surveys. However categorical thinking is also occasionally problematic. One should bear in mind that the existence or evidence of a phenomenon isn't dependent upon the category into which it is placed. Rather the category exists as result of the observation and existence of what has been observed and thus is a measure of our collective understanding it at any given time.

Medicines and the categorising of drugs is a perfect example, by being a reflection on their observed effects on the body, and the changes and alterations to the categories over time reflecting how our knowledge may change.

When it comes to legality and politics, it would seem that categories take on an importance far  outweighing their actual purpose. With inclusion into one or other category inferring a legitimacy and implied view of the world that may or may not be the case. As an example just look at the  Republican verses Democrat categorisation in the US currently. Many people assume all republicans have a universal view of things like race, religion, and certain civil freedoms, yet this is not always so. With regard to legal protection, being defined as "included" in one or more categories often confers certain rights and/or protections on people. The important point here is this:

Humans are always individuals. That fact cannot be altered as a result of changes to categories, their borders or definitions, since those borders are arbitrary thus we remain unchanged by them. 

However the same cannot be said of the effects on humans. Imposed inclusion or exclusion to and from a category, and the resultant change in other's perceptions of us is very real. While we are not directly changed, the interaction with the world can - and often does change  - dramatically. (Just look at a typical work promotion or lottery winner scenario, or lets say a trans person coming out and losing their well paid job)

This months topic at queerness is "Gender". One of these categories, & one that has seen much debate in recent months. Various positions and definitions exist, both of what "gender is" and what we should do about it. If you like, this is the debate on how the human race should subcategorise itself, and who should be allowed to occupy which bits of the subcategories be they man, woman, NB, agender etc.

There are many in the trans population who (for very justifiable reasons) at the mention of these arguments will do what I predicted above. A tired weary roll of the eyes and the thought "not again". Some do not wish to discuss the matter, fed up of hearing over and over the counter arguments to their existence and validity.

It's hard to argue incessantly in the face of constant recrimination and dissent. It's hard, after rolling ones eyes and mentally ticking the list of things we've heard time and time again, to pick up a pen or a keyboard or a leaflet or a protest sign and rebut these arguments again and again and again. And. Again.

However I would argue that we must.

We must continue to engage the likes of Murray, Greer, or other elements of the not so complimentary press, and to continuously, ceaselessly state the case of a more appropriate categorical system that takes into account new levels of knowledge and understanding since the original "gender" term and its subdivided boxes were first labeled. No matter how boring, dull and repetitive or reductive this seems there must always be a ready answer to those who would use categorical thinking, or even its abolition,  as basis for an exclusionary policy.

So what does that mean for those who stand outside these old original boxes, or have the legitimacy of their being in them questioned?

It mean's giving consideration to definitional and causality arguments. It means citing historically and culturally different views of gender, as examples of humanities variety and wisdom. It means acknowledging and debating the legal disparity between current legislation for "Sex"and "Gender" (Legal definitions that were obviously built on the old category system, thus may require revision)

It means that rather than discounting every single point that our opponents foist upon us whilst yelling "bigot" and "transphobe", because we assume everyone knows them to be false, poorly constructed arguments, we must subject each to critical examination and structured philosophical, scientific rebuttal, to once again prove our point. We simply cannot afford to close down the discussion by means of an outstretched palm and "no we aint going there" responses. Not any more.

It's dull, it's repetitive and in some cases can lead those who engage opponents in the gender debate to being somewhat ostracised by other, more entrenched sections of their own "category" Since by giving ground they lay themselves open to accusations of exclusionary views themselves. (guilt by association if you will)

But consider the alternative.

To disengage from the unpalatable discourse, and to assume the debate is over because "everyone knows better now" is to invite those opposing views which we give so little credence to have an unchallenged voice with free reign to an audience that still doesn't know.

The Greer's and Murray of this world are not speaking to us, They are aiming at an entirely different audience. The ones who don't know. If we don't reply in kind, those words go unchallenged. The social standing of our critics confers implied legitimacy on their words allowing the myths and exclusionary rhetoric being pedalled as informed opinion to gain an authoritative credence it frankly doesn't deserve.

Theres a good reason Modern day philosophers still study and apply the 3000 yr old writings of Socrates, Plato, (Circa 399 BC) and Epicurus (307BC). Various models of ethics and 19th century examples of thinkers such as Decarte, Kant, Rousseau and a host of others. How humans think about, and therefore categorise, themselves has been the subject of debate for at least that long.

It would seem then, that assuming "the debate(s) regarding gender(s) are over" is perhaps a tad arrogant?

With respect to gender itself. Whilst questions of causality and scientific discovery are important, they themselves will not tell us what to do. Scientific arguments may clarify where we place our category boundaries as descriptors, assisting a legal argument. However the ethical debate still continues, since the scientific & legal arguments cannot solve the ethical ones. All are equally important however, if one views knowledge, learning and parity for all as being the ultimate goal, rather than "being proven right"

That our species still have problems with this concept is a sad reflection on the Human Condition. Being born black, white, gay, straight, trans, cis, rich, poor, or whatever political persuasion you ultimately gravitate towards. These are not problems. It's our collective attitude towards the meaning and validity of each catagory that are problems.

Dont believe me? Just look at America. After 8 years of a progressive president who happened to be Black, people had stopped believing that old outdated rhetoric had any power. They stopped engaging. Result? A white supremacist in the oval office. Brexit? Need I say more?

So, whatever the category, whatever the conversation, we must always engage the debate, because ones thing is for sure. Your opponents definitely will.


Sarah.

Something different...

Ola,

Of late I've been aware of a darker tone creeping into this blog. It is probably inevitable, since every person who examines what life, and "being human", actually means might come up with some ....err.... disheartening revelations?

Anyhow, in an attempt to redress the balance, and focus on the positive narrative for a while......

........Actually having sat and thought, staring at the blank page for a good 5 minutes, I've realised that nothing immediately jumps to mind as wholly positive.....or wholly negative. which ...oddly is a kinda positive?. :-)

Things just "happen' these days. I rarely describe much meaning to them, beyond that of the moment. Perhaps I'm becoming an Existentialist?

Except for one thing. In precisely 4 days I get to go and collect my daughter for the week.

That is Good.

The title "Stubbornly Optimistic" was initially meant as something of a tongue in cheek comment on the situations in which I found myself after life imploded in early 2010.

Some 7 yrs on from that point, and despite a world of random occurrence and mishap, or the discriminations both big and small I am still here.

"I" &"I am" are powerful concepts. Whilst the world might not know who "I am" and those that I work, discuss & argue with whilst generally existing alongside them might criticise or question, it's becoming clearer every day just  who "I am"

• I am that kid who always drove teachers mad asking "but Why?
• I am the adult that continues to ask that simple question, constantly and infuriatingly, but now with bigger words and more syllables
• I am something the world defines as a parent and my daughter defines as her "mad dad" in a way that often makes me chuckle. 
• I am teacher, mentor, guide and go getter of food when the daughter runs out of sausages.
• I am terrible at singing but can pull of a mean car dance shuffle
• I am the narrator of a world of funny voices, that make the "wee princess" laugh in the car.
• I am Stubbornly optimistic.

Which is almost everything. At this point in my life, 7 years on from the bubble bursting and dumping me quite uncerimoniously on my arse, wet, worn out, and severely whipped by life, what "I am" still occupies a part of my mind that will never ever give up:

Out of the night that covers me, 

      Black as the pit from pole to pole, 

I thank whatever gods may be 

      For my unconquerable soul. 

In the fell clutch of circumstance 

      I have not winced nor cried aloud. 

Under the bludgeonings of chance 

      My head is bloody, but unbowed. 

Beyond this place of wrath and tears 

      Looms but the Horror of the shade, 

And yet the menace of the years 

      Finds and shall find me unafraid. 

It matters not how strait the gate, 

      How charged with punishments the scroll, 

I am the master of my fate, 

      I am the captain of my soul. 

Now be honest, how many of you read that and heard Morgan Freeman's voice in your head?

So, the positive bit in todays musings is that I suggest we are all captains, we all have agency, and we all have ability to use that which we have to its best effect. The first part in changing any given situation is the mental acceptance of one's own refusal to be bound by the circumstance's in which you find yourself.

I haven't quoted Dr Dyer in a while, but this seems apt.

"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change"

And to finish heres a random cool video i found on Youtube the other day ... I've been following Steph Sanjati for years now, and this made me smile... (trust me).

So. Despite all my recent words to the contrary, the word isn't all dark, doom and dreary. Just bits of it. When dealing with all those bits don't forget to come up for air occasionally and look at the other stuff. The view is pretty amazing.

Till next time,

Sarah

Ethics, Maxims, and Activists.

Hello!

Today's foray into philosophical thought continues with a few meandering musings on ethics, maxims, otherwise known as motivations, and activists. In this specific case activists in the field of gender diversity, but broadly speaking any area of activist work, be it animal rights, nuclear disarmament, even philosophy, or whatever you might envisage.

Recently there was a case over in a US college where the graduation ceremony came under scrutiny for reasons of Gender Identity. In essence it boiled down to a long standing tradition of girls wearing gold gowns and boys wearing green gowns. This as you might imagine can be somewhat problematic to those who transition, be it from one side of the gender conversation to the other, or somewhere in the middle, whether between the two or neither of each.

So. The school principle asked the student body what it's member's wanted, and it appears that the feedback received was for trans people to wear the colour they identified with. Simples.

But wait a minute, theres only two choices, so what of those who are partially or wholly in the category of both or neither?

So the school now has a choice of routes it might take, given the wishes of the student body, that all gender identities be recognised.

• Introduce a few new colour options for those who associate outside a "two party system" 
• Decree everyone wear the same colour, regardless of gender be it cis, trans,binary or otherwise. 

Here's where it gets a little unclear dependent on ones viewpoint. What is the ethical option for the school here? Do as the student body asks, or make everyone the same by way of elimination of the colour difference that brought up the question in the first place? It could be argued that the first solution addresses and solves the problem, where as on the other hand the second, dependent on its method of application could do so, from some perspectives, or is it merely removing the problem while presenting no actual solution to the issue of recognition? Furthermore, gender identity is for some a private matter, as such is it ethical to broadcast this diversity?

Thus we arrive at the questions of perspective, motive, and choice.

Choice first. If the students choose to wear a robe that celebrates their diversity in a public way then that is their choice and thus carries no ethical implication in so far as  privacy concerns. If they wish to do so but are denied that choice that would be ethically questionable at best or discriminatory at worst.

Perspective. Some of the student body might be ok with the one colour solution or a two colour solution, since it fits their requirements. But hold on, if it unethically disadvantages the choice of other groups then that too would also surely be morally questionable? Indeed it's the whole premise on which this argument of representation is based.

Motive. "Why" is either option chosen? Was it to celebrate diversity, promote inclusion, or simply remove an administration headache that the school didn't really want to deal with? Who's wishes are to be taken into consideration here? Are all views given parity or are some of the stakeholders in this question of representation accorded greater value? If accord must be reached can it be done so as to cause the minimum disruption to the minimum number of people, yet still be ethically sound?

let's look at each scenario and see who the winners and losers are:

The one colour solution, 

First of all the problem is which colour? If one choses the historically male associated green colour then its arguable those who don't identify in that way are unethically disadvantaged even discriminated against. Similarly so if one chooses the historically female associated colour. Those who identify out side the binary are adversely affected in both scenarios. A problem with this approach is therefore that it could be said to erase the gender representation of for all, and removes choice. Perhaps then one introduces an entirely new none gender associated colour scheme? Ok, that works better, but still doesn't allow choice or representation, although it admittedly removes the historical gendered connotations thus the potential for individuals to experience dysphoric complications arising from a one colour solution could be lessened as a result. 

The two colour solution

This "could" work by virtue of allowing students to wear the robe they most closely identified with, but clearly doesn't deal in any way with the group of individuals who are both, neither or fluid. Thus again denying them choice, representation and of course leaving open the question of discrimination. 

The multi colour solution.

This presents an option for male, female and NB identifying people, perhaps with variations on the NB that reflect where people might see themselves to be on the oft quoted gender continuum. It allows choice for all, and crucially deny's none of the groups representation. Each group can celebrate it's individuality without adversely impacting on another group, thus the need for compromise is lessened. The down side of this solution may be that it's the most complicated and costly to implement and requires the highest level of engagement with the school authorities. 

So what did the school authorities actually do? 

They imposed a single colour solution whereby all students are to wear the colour that was previously associated with male identifying students. 

Consider the words "imposed" and "solution"

The result, perhaps unsuprisingly, was that the student body was unhappy, since most of the students including cis, trans and NB ones did not want this course of action. Imposition of an unwanted  solution on an unwilling student body unsurprisingly caused dissent. This was then directed at the trans and NB people, since they were seen as the drivers for the need to change anything in the first place.

Was this a "solution" in the true sense, or did it just paper over the issue so the school authorities could ignore it and move on claiming to be diversity inclusive? 

It's at this point "motive" once more rears its head. 

The 18th century philosopher Emmanuel Kant described the intent behind any action as a "Maxim" "A thought" if you will, that is the reasoning behind any action. So for example the "good samaritan' might have been acting on either of the maxims "help thy neighbour" or "help thy neighbour and you shall be rewarded" Two very different things in terms the ethical nature of the action brought about by the maxim, even though the action itself might be near identical in each case.

So what was the "maxim" in the case of the school authority? 

"Celebrate gender diversity, promoting freedom of gender expression regardless of gender identity" 

This seems doubtful as it would logically lead one to choose a three or more colour system, or the one colour system that is unrelated to the gendered colour markers of history, although as  previously stated that second option deny's choice thus is poorer fit to this mxim

How about:

"Act in the best interests of the students, to minimise sources of discrimination based on gender diversity"

Nope. Since that is arguable on the basis of the chosen system being an imposed and unwanted one that it discriminates against a huge number of students, specifically non male identifying, be they cis or trans alike, NB or otherwise.

Having given this some thought the only maxim I can come up with that adequately covers the imposition of an unwanted male associated single colour scheme is this:

"Make them all wear the same colour, and make it green since the school colour is green"

or the longer version...

"Make them all wear the same colour, so we appear inclusive and gender conforming, Make the colour Green since the schools colours are green, and the problem will go away. If anyone complains then we can shift the blame onto the transgender student body" 

As one can see, either version of this maxim is ethically questionable, since it puts school and public perception above student welfare and true parity of gender diversity. Although the flawed (IMO) "solution" that this maxim gives rise to could actually be argued to benefit a small number of students, namely Male leaning NB, and/or Cis male, it still disadvantages everyone outside that demographic. Also, it's the imposition on an unwilling student body that is the crux here as I said  before. were it not imposed, but requested by the students, then arguably things could be viewed differently, although still not without flaws. But I'll come back to this point. 

So where do the activists come into this? 

This whole (it has to be said relatively minor) issue of clothing raised a discussion amongst the trans community in my local area. Myself and few others discussed the ethical issues surrounding the schools actions. However some in the community viewed the schools single colour policy as a positive. These people were predominantly, though not exclusively those that identified in the NB area of the gender spectrum and in some cases actually worked within gender diversity teaching provision. 

It became apparent when I attempted to put forward the argument I've just explained in this article that it really wasn't up for debate in the minds of some of these individuals. To the point where I myself was accused outright of being something of a transphobic individual with internalised issues. 

Understandably as you might imagine, I had few "issues" with this, and it put me in mind of yet  another quote from a favourite thinker of mine 

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” 

When Socrates said those words he was referring to the basic human trait of slinging insults when the other party has presented an insurmountable argument. I have written about the dangers inherent in taking too stringent a no platforming standpoint, and in accusing me of biased thinking and poor judgment this was a case in point. It was simply an attempt to shut the discussion down, perhaps one might suggest due to perceived seniority of social position and knowledge base, but that's conjecture. 

As you might imagine. It didn't work. Such tactics  rarely do. As ever I asked myself "Why?" "Why is it the case that others wish to shut down the argument?" 

After some reflection, the answer seemed quite obvious, so much so i at first discounted it. The small number of individuals that the ethically questionable actions of the school does "appear" to benefit is indeed the NB identifying students. So one could, as these people did, view this is as "good" outcome. 

There are models of ethics that subscribe to "good" and "bad" regardless of consequences. Specifically religious type models. Other more commonly understood models of ethics are motive based, as in Kant's view which I outline above or consequential, best known as utilitarian arguments. (Bentham and Mill being two proponents). In this case the actions of the school authorise fail both a Motive based approach as demonstrated, and also I'd argue consequential one, be it positive or negative. Thus in essence the only remaining justification for taking a position of describing the outcome as a good action is "because I believe it to be so"  

But I'd suggest this is false/flawed logic. For without fully examining the intent behind the schools actions, - those  "maxims" upon which they were working - acceptance of a perceived benefit is a fools bargain, for it is transient and without real substance. Additionally, since the other members of the student body are wholly disadvantaged in terms of their choice and representation within this scenario, then those who see this as a "good" outcome are championing the very thing that they would actually decry were the situation reversed and NB/other people excluded. Why did they attempt to shut me down? In my own humble opinion, it was so that they didn't have to contend with the ethical holes in their own argument, and ironically, deal with their own internal bias.

So, that set me thinking. (again? yeah things do that) 

Surely one of the central tenants of being an activist and agent of discourse, change, bi partisan progress and societal evolution is to be open mined and to dispationately critically evaluate what is put before you? To look beyond the obvious? 

The requirement to do so and be practiced at it is the reason why student philosophers/lawyers and those who engage in professional discourse often indulge in framing arguments for positions with which they actually disagree. 

One could reasonably say that any given activist has an end goal in mind, thus they are inherently predisposed to perceive actions that move towards and align with that goal as positive. If we accept this premise, then any activist, in any field, must have an agenda, and therefore cannot be deemed impartial. 

This is not a problem as long as they remain aware of this trait & actively compensate for it. After all we all fight for what we believe in. 

BUT. 

It would be nice to think that we humans could all do this activist stuff ethically, logically and insightfully without resorting to knee-jerk reactions, criticisms of opposing viewpoints and down right unjustifiable insults. Particularly when that criticism is based on well founded argument, from inside our own diverse membership.. It is this "knee jerk stuff" that tears the trans movement, be it binary NB gender queer or whatever, apart from the inside. It invites the question: 

How effectively can we discuss issues with our real detractors? 

We do not exist in a vacuum, particularly in America, where this decision was likely taken by a white, cis gender guy, who may or may not have had sympathetic views on "gender transition". Believing that our own "informed" view is the underpinning motivation of every seemingly good outcome is a grave grave error, as is uncritical acceptance of the false progress born of indifference to our diversity. As a result every "success", no matter how well intentioned or hard fought, born from that error will surely end in failure, for any change will be short lived, easily reversed and superficial. 

NB as an identity grouping is the most marginalised of our trans trait human characteristics it deserves to be championed. However that does not confer on those who champion it's rights the legitimacy to do so at the expense of other trans trait identities, binary or otherwise and, as in this case, certain members of the cis gender student body. Indeed the mistake is to believe that Trans/Cis, Binary and NB are mutually exclusive at all.  For even a robe has a middle and two ends, regardless of its length or colour.

Until next time, keep talking, and whatever you do, remember:

"Many of the truths we cling to depends greatly on our point of view"

Ben Kenobi, 

So change it regularly, lest you believe your view is the only one possible, or worthwhile

tata,

Sarah.

Edit, Since writing this  there were further  outcomes. You can read the Epilogue to this wee story Here

The meaning of unemployment.

Welcome to a sunny, lazy Sunday...

This morning I rose from my sleep after a late night playing D&D at a friends house. (For those in the know I was the dungeon master and will be for the next game, the third in a series of three)

As I was wandering around doing the usual stuff, washing clothes etc, my mind went back the conversation I'd had with one of my friends in the car whilst dropped him off after the game. I've been out of regular work for some time now, since Sept last year, so almost 6 months. My friend has had similar periods of "unemployment" a few years back and although now very much back on track with his career, we batted back and forth ideas and experience about the best way to write a cv etc, to get noticed amongst the pool of applicants. Given I'm six months in, common sense would suggest mine needs a reshuffle.

This lead to a thought this morning, as I pondered that word.

"Unemployment" 

What does that actually mean? Occasionally I get myself down hearted due to my lack of resources currently and thats - pretty obviously - down to my situation as regards paid work. However, am I actually 'un-employed" ?

If you look up the definition of the word the first hit on google is:

It's the synonyms I find most Interesting. "idle" being one of them. And "Jobless". One could suggest I am neither, since I am writing this blog, (plus others) and spend a number of hours in academically inclined contemplation of philosophical thought & research plus doing my D&D planning. Occasionally I fix the odd bike, advise a friend of mine with a fledging bike business, and just last week I serviced the brakes on Vanessa, my old combo van, currently much battered and much loved . So one could argue I'm neither idle nor jobless. 

Yet given an accusation levelled at me a few days ago, of being a "Pseudo Intellectual" and societies propensity to label people and assign veracity to their arguments based on somewhat arbitrary qualifiers, it's made me think. For example to be seen as legitimately knowing and understanding management principles one must be in a management job, thus I cant help wondering what qualifiers people place on me, an "unemployed, Trans-woman"? and moreover I'm questioning do they apply? 

I would argue that since I'm "employing my time" doing other things I'm certainly not "unemployed" in that sense, yet it's very much true that what I do does not pay me directly, other than perhaps the  link between searching for a (better) paid method of employing my time, and proof of that search being linked to a substance renumeration called benefits. Am I thus then being paid to look for work and therefore am "employed" in that capacity? (which would mean i wouldn't be unemployed and as result couldn't claim the benefit....yeah thats weird? ...) 

Furthermore, unemployed has become shorthand for Idle in the minds of some, a perception of literally "doing nothing" and thus my financial constraints are seen as by choice. Whilst it's true that my choices in life have lead to this point (how could they not have?) I'd not say I would "choose" to remain in this situation were other options presented or discovered. This perception of unemployed = idle then brings in the skewed morality of the deserving and undeserving person. Those who actively seek to better themselves being seen perhaps as deserving of more assistance in doing so and thus achieving that aim. 

All in all it's just a bit of amusing word play. I am reminded of the words of Tom Cruise in "The last Samurai", where he plays a conflicted American soldier struggling with memories of questionable actions. 

"I am beset by the ironies of my life"

Side note, it's one of my favourite characters, and movies. It speaks to the shifting historical context of  morality, remorse, honour and respect for culture, plus the concept of finding personal peace and redemption. The examination of which is sorely needed today. 

Thankfully I haven't chosen the route Nathan Algren, the central character in the film did, initially climbing into a whiskey bottle to escape his memories, but believe me when I say at certain points in my life the option was more than just considered.

Many years ago I walked into a car dealership. It was to collect business cards for a school project. I was 16 ish. The first time I walked in I was summarily dismissed by the sales guy, who saw a scruffy kid. The next time I walked in and happened to be wearing smart clothes. I received much more assistance. Why? 

Perceptions. Same person but a different image, Thus it is with "unemployed" "trans-woman" and "pseudo" intellectual. 

These labels merely define a point, a discrete snapshot of our lives, and cannot ever encompass the whole. Confucius died believing himself a failure since no monarch took up his words, and Socrates was sentenced to death and executed by the very athenians he had sought to educate. Yet after their deaths both men gave rise to institutions that carried their ideas forward for centuries. 

"Failure" for both was but a temporary thing. Their success lay in their "knowledge". Knowledge of humility, humanity and the importance of each, with their employment of these and other traits. There success was not defined by themselves at least, on whether they were paid well because of it. 

Perhaps here then is my mini epiphany. Employ what knowledge you have to your greatest effect, and you shall, in time, see results, regardless of your current situation and other peoples definitions of it. Or, to put it another way, 

"If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavours to live the life that he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours."

Henry David Thoreau

Until next time keep it #stubbornlyoptimistic

Sarah 

#officecat takes over the optimistic blog

Hi,

My human is out currently .. she does that occasionally, sometimes getting into that big noisy white thing with "weells", and sometimes she just goes walking...she does look funny with only two legs... tonight she was walking quite fast, which i think she refers to as "going for arub" or something..

So I thought i'd quickly type this whilst she is away, if i get caught i'll just curl up on the office chair and deny all knowledge...

shhh dont tell her? !

Sooooo

life is cool for cats just now.. caught a mouse yesterday.. Its getting easier cos the little buggers are moving around more cos it not so cold. mind you I was out all night and by the time my human let  me back in the house my paws were sooooo cold! oh my poor ears!

I love it when do come in tho'.. she's just got new box of those puuuuurple packets that have food in... I usually convince her to give me at least  two.. humans really cant resist the big eye'd look.. lol

Sometimes, if I'm lucky i get this stuff that comes outta round metal looking things. It was the first thing I got from her when i kinda decided to live here. (well she was really nice and  tbh.. i needed somewhere..) I think she calls it "somt Una"...it nice and after that i let  her  tickle my ears. ... it makes her  feel better ... and to be honest the belly rubs are cool as long as the guys in the garden aint looking through the window....... hey! wait a minute  .. oh really? like thats embarrassing. I mean who takes  picture of  people when their asleep ... I mean .. look....

How embarrassing, how....... uncivilised....ok.. where was i... ? oh yeah...

Like i say my humans cool, but lately I noticed a change though. I have had to make my feelings known a bit more obviously. .. My human sits for hours in front of these two bright square things full of moving pictures, doing what she calls "tipe eeng" so much so she doesn't know i've watched her and learnt how to do it... while pretending to be asleep...sneaky eh?

shhh whats that ? ....oh its ok.. wind.. (too much somtuna)

but where was i?  oh yes on occasion knocking stuff off the desk or clawing the office chair isn't enough... get this..I've had to actually sit in front of the big glowing sqeens and get her  move away and do something else. if it real bad i'll go and sit on the big pad of  buttons... look..

 

So anyways... I wanna tell you guys a story... oh ..! no wait  here she comes back in from that "arub" thing... remember you aint seen me right?

peace out.....

#office cat.

The blank page....

Hi world.

I'm sat at the computer, a blank page in front of me. I am wondering just exactly how to put my thoughts and opinions into words on the screen.

How does one articulate ones observations, concerns and fears, with a nod to critical thinking, objectivity and solid research.

Also, I confess a pervasuive sinking feeling. The title of this blog is "Stubbornly Optimistic". Yet I think you'll forgive me if I say that currently one has to be uncommonly stubborn to be all that optimistic regarding world events. The entirely justified, yet unending stream of negative news spewing forth regarding The Trump's actions is demoralising.

I asked myself if that is because of my own political opinions and beliefs. In truth perhaps so, although thats also an over simplification.

Take the latest direct action by the Trump. Blocking ingress of people from certain countries for various time periods. The countries concerned being ones in which the residents have not instigated any succesful terrorist action in or on America. So, even if one agrees this is the right action, it is against the wrong countries.

Is it the right action? Well where does the actual real threat of terrorism come from? Not from the refugees, thats well known. So even were the action against the "right" countries it's proven to be ineffective via already held data.

So, I refer back to my last few blogs. Is The Trump an idiot or a genius? We know he is fical to say the least but one has to ask why these countries. If not for security, as the "alternative justification" would suggest, then why?

I had suggested that it may be a republican christian fundamentalist policy enacted by proxy, so they can distance themselves as a party from political fall out. Allowing The Trump to take the fall as it were. However that doesn't hold up. Pence, has previously tweeted....

Pence may be a fully paid up Christian fundamentalist and have his own litany of faults, but he is a politician. Very much not a loose cannon. It would however seem his views are flexible to political expediency. The pursuit of power, perhaps for entirely legitamate reasons from his POV, may ultimately be via a means that he comes to regret. (especially if it leads to war with Iran....now thats a proper OOPSIE) 

The civil right act has outlawed discrimination based on race in the US since 1964. But here's another angle. Last year we saw racial tensions rise. We saw black and white Americans killing each other  based predominantly on their skin colour. 

Ww have also had 8 years of  an erudite, educated and liberal, but also black US President. There are some in America who only see the 4th item on that list as anything of consequence.

"We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and to restore its promise for all of our people."

Donald J Trump...

So the current immigration block. Is it race discrimination dressed up as security? The alt right links that Trump had (has?) do rather suggest a racial motivation. His former CEO Steve Bannon now holds a position in the administration as chief advisor no less, and a high level security post. based on what experience? Ideology?

It begs the question. Who was Trump talking about when he referenced "our" people? Not "American people" but "our" people? 

Whoever holds The Trumps ear, be it Pence, or Bannon, will shape the "tone" of American domestic events for good or ill. Latterly we haven't seen much of the former. 

However...

The ACLU just  gave us the first and perhaps most significant silver lining. Trump is facing battle in the courts. In congress, and on the streets, ordinary Americans with the legal skill sets are working pro bono to arrange the freeing of those detained. Most significantly legal action has been taken and succeeded  stating this action by The trump is unconstitutional. Effectively the law courts reversed the president's order. 

America is slowly turning it gaze inward, and if not yet at war with itself,  is seemingly having some pointed internal discussions.  

The second "possible" sliver lining came from an unexpected direction. Teresa May. Seemingly attempting to reign in the worst of The Trumps hyperbole. I say "possible" as it is early days and there may yet be other motives behind the PM's apparent eagerness to meet with the new president's office. It is fair to say that the UK and the USA do need to cultivate a working relationship, regardless of the personalities in office. Though quite how symbiotic this one is likely to be is unclear at this point. 

Perhaps the most Stubbornly Optimistic observation of recent days is this. 

President he maybe, but The Trump is still merely one man. Granted he has a team of like minded  group think behind him. However there are far more people in influential positions willing to oppose his transgressions than extend them. Ordinary people too, alternative communication accounts springing up in answer to the national parks twitter shut down....

Alternative twitter accounts....

The more People in all walks of life mobilise, speak out and act, the weaker he will become. That may be scant comfort, given that the world will keep spinning whilst that happens, with Russia and others dropping into at the power vacuum whilst the US has it eyes elsewhere... but in the current climate it is a comfort that I for one will take. 

The Trump may yet make America Great Again. However I doubt he envisaged that he and the white nationalist agenda would the common enemy that brought them to that end. 

The process however may be far from pretty, or peaceful. 

Lows, Laughs and Legality.

Oh Dear.

I feel Golum's pain, truly.

Tonight I had hoped to write something that was a little more "uplifting" than my last article. After all it was, as one reader rather succinctly put it, "Bleak".

But.....

America's Trump continues to reverberate around the globe, and the smell doesn't get any sweeter.

Pipelines being built, environmental protections reversed. Climate change monitoring has its funding frozen. Suposedly "The Trump" has won awards for "Environmentalist Trump".... I'll just  leave this  here...

link to Trumps Environmental awards evidence.

Soon theres going to be line of merchandising dolls no doubt to go with the cinematic drama...

President Trump (Certified Free from vested interests)
Environmentalist Trump (Including awards certificate - missing from box)
Businessman Trump (with 6 certified bankruptcy proofs. Please send off the coupons enclosed for the tax returns..we'll get them back to you honest)
Making America great again Trump..(with free red hat)
Truthful Trump (production cancelled due to lack of ...well.... truth)
And of course not forgetting....
 LGBT Trump with free Mike pence Doll and & day pass to a reparative therapy Spa of your choice.

(All made under license in China)

In short the uplifting article i was hoping to pen this evening has taken a battering.... However all is not lost.

In the face of what some might dress as outright lies, but other's recognise as bone fide "alternative facts". The day after this infant(ile) American administration began it's long 4 year march to ignominy and ridicule, we have a refreashing dose of law, order and good old fashioned common sense from the UK Supreme court.  

Due Process. Love or loathe Brexit, the proper process and legal frame works must be adhered to. A fact "The Trump" would be wise to pay heed to.  The UK parliament must now debate the issue and satisfy the UK constitutional requirements. Proof that, even now, no man, (or woman) is above democracy or the rule of law. 

I hope you'll forgive another Tolkien indulgence as i quote everyone's favourite Grey Wizard 

"There are other forces at work here besides the will of evil - and that is an encouraging thought" 

So. What to bring as a counter foil to the bleak and dreary? 

How about a tribute to a funny guy, whilst poking fun a the whole European "thing" circa 1939 style.

Allo Allo ran for a good number of years when i was a kid and even though some of the humor has dated a little, the cheeky take on the serious business of occupied France in the war complete with dodgy accents and terrible french from English agent come Police officer "crabtree" still makes me Chuckle...

But I'm gonna leave the final word to Ronnie Barker. When boxed in, be it figuratively or literally, there's three things to remember:

So it's goodnight from me...and its goodnight from him 

Till next time on #stubbornlyoptimistic

The Trump Card?

Hello Readers.

My last #stubbornlyoptimistic post was entitled the faithful navigator. In it I focused on the personal and professional challenges of one person, Moi, in a sea of ever changing possibilities, problems and persistent prejudices.

Having watched the rather momentous occurrences on the international political stage recently I have to say faithful navigation is something we all very much need at present.

But where to begin? The story starts, perhaps a little strangely in 1937. JRR Tolkien's "The hobbit" was published that year, though it was a more modern adaptation of that story by Peter Jackson that kept me entertained this evening and set me on the path to writing this piece. Specifically, "The battle of the Five Armies" For those not familiar with Tolkien's works, bear with me, the link will become apparent.

So what of real world events? We have over the course of this last 7 days seen the UK Prime Minister continuing her attempts to look for some area of provenance on the world stage, Martin McGuinness has resigned on health grounds leaving the Northern Ireland Stormont assembly somewhat precariously poised. And of course we have seen the Swearing in and Taking Office of now President Donald J Trump of America. Elections are forthcoming soon in continental Europe. France, Germany and Italy all have somewhat nationalistic parties gathering a head of steam in their respective political arena's. All seemingly unconnected, random and disparate events? Maybe.

There are those currently in the media and elsewhere who denigrate former president Obama for doing little on the world stage these last 8 yrs. Forgetting perhaps that a Democrat in the oval office  is often thwarted by Republican control over congress. Others want change from the status Quo here at home in the  UK and hence we now have Brexit with an overall rise in nationalistic rhetoric. Peace can be dull. Yet it was not always so. I am 42 years old. I can remember a time when UK forces did not openly wear uniform on home soil for fear of direct attack. Overall in the western world, since the the Demolition of the Berlin wall 1989 and the good Friday agreement of 1998, US and UK citizens have enjoyed quite the peaceful and benign experience. Continental Europe having had a broadly similar experience, save for a few basque bombings every now and then.

What's my point? My point is that years of broadly Quiet, Peaceful Democracy has bread an unconscious apathy along with discontent at the usual peacetime economic challenges. Politicians are "all the same", voting is "pointless" and "War" is something that happens "elsewhere" to "other countries" or "in the past". We can see live feeds on CNN or Sky/BBC of missiles going into Gaza/Lebanon/Iraq/Kuwait. "But" says the mass population in these western countries, "they are unlikely to drop en mass on to us, we're safe". (not withstanding 9/11, which of course is the major and cataclysmic terror act of our time. My point being it was not an every day occurrence to be bombed or shot at whilst crossing the street) Safe to spend more effort en masse voting on "the voice" than on governmental referendums or similar.

When this "apathy" happens to large enough groups of people  "Me" replaces "Us" in the group think mindset. The thirst for "change" based on "inequality" and the perception of being a "have not" starts to rise. What people vote for, or even if they vote, becomes a function of narrow self interest and nothing more.

President Trump and those behind him saw this. He is in power through a wave of promises to bring about just such a "change" and to gift power and prosperity to those whose perception is that they have none, whether that be fact or otherwise. BUT this administration gained office on a very focused agenda, with virtually no mention of wider foreign policy. The sheer malignant genius of managing to  gain to office by giving literally no details of future international intent is staggering. So in tune were Trumps team with the "me" mindset that they played it flawlessly. So great was the emphasis on the man himself as deplorable human being, - which frankly I doubt anyone of sense would argue - and his business type rhetoric of tough talk that the vacuum of foreign policy information was missed. Missed by an electorate guided by near sighted self interest and/or circumvented by archaic voting practices. That is until now.

The USA has for years been an intermediary in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine. Today the new President has signalled a major shift in foreign policy regarding the area. Israel announced it  was approving the building of new homes in the "occupied territory" a move long opposed by Obama's administration and UN security council resolutions, and there are overtones of the US embassy in Israel being moved to Jerusalem. That this announcement came after a phone call conversation between Trump and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is suggestive to say the least.

Seriously? bear with me on this point. Extremists usurping the name of Islam and religion are already doing a great job of the odd terror attack on foreign shores. (like I said above anyone remember 9/11? or the London bus and tube bombings?) Today most Arabs are Muslim, thus the extremist factions purporting to speak for Muslims, however misguided, are not going to take kindly to this perceived slight against the Arab vision of a Palestinian state.

Ok. back to 1937. This time not Erabor of Tolkien's world, but Germany. Hitler's Germany. March 1938 and Austria is annexed. October of the same year Hitler takes the Sudetenland. That portion of the Czechoslovakia border area that is predominantly German speaking. During this time the popularity of Hitler at home was huge. He had brought back pride and postive change to the people of  Germany who had very demonstrably lost it all in the recent war. History of course, now tells us his Foreign policy was any thing but positive.

Now I'm not suggesting Trump is about to annex New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, as i don't think even he would dream that up. But bear in mind it was Hitlers actions in Poland that kicked off WW2.  Germany invaded Poland and caused France and Britain to get involved. We currently have the Syrian conflict being a show of strength between Russian and American ideology by proxy.  Kicking over the previously dormant hornets nest of the Gaza strip could very well be akin to lighting a slow burn fuse that begins a war not between the countries of the "western world" but between those erroneously usurping the "Muslim"/Arab banner and the western military machines. And we know Trumps thoughts on "Muslims" don't we? Anyone else think it's reminiscent of the scapegoated Jews? Subtly different but still eerily worrisome.

Far fetched? Consider that Trump has already mentioned beefing up the American military. Consider that the world has already seen one war that was fought on false pretence. (Iraq 2.0 anyone?) Hitler didn't need to invade Poland. He merely needed an excuse to invade Poland. Austria and the Sudetenland were pretty much historically German thus the international community had little reason to oppose his goals there. But once he went for Poland, well France and Britain had the "reason" for  "justifiable" action. Note I put justifiable in quotes. This does not mean the war against hitler was wrong in my view, far from it. However it serves to highlight that before a country can act there must be political will for a given intervention. Hence Chamberlain's repeated meetings with hitler before the declaration of war, and Tony Blairs WMD's

So back to Trump's decision on the Gaza strip. Why? Either he's very stupid or very clever. Stupid because he fails to see that overturning decades old political stability is dangerous, or clever because that's exactly what he and his team does see and want to create. Light the fuse, create the reason for  intervention and you justify the creation of large military machinery to counter the threat that wasn't there until it was made so. Drag others into the conflict by proxy and you have pretty much a prelude to a large scale conflagration.

Ok ok. I can hear you all going "oh come on.. really .. is that actually gonna happen?" Sure it might not. But consider the timing. Inherent instability of Brexit/stormont/European politics and the growing nationalistic feelings across the world and ask yourself how stable do you think it is? With the right levers even the heaviest of rocks can be moved with but a single push. The American President is on record saying NATO is obsolete. The safety net that held together the threads of 67 years of peace is slowly being removed or undermined.

So what of Tolkien, and the dwarves of Erabor? Erabor was a Dwarven kingdom of untold riches, lost long ago to a brooding dragon who hoarded all the gold and treasures for his own. After the dragon was defeated the Dwarven king was for a time possessed of a sickness. A sickness where anyone who came near the gates of Erabor was perceived as a threat to the riches and a potential Thief. So taken was he by ownership of his kingdom's wealth that he broke all bonds of honesty, loyalty and friendship before he recovered his mind. However by that time many lay dead, entreaties from other civilisations of middle earth had fallen on deaf ears, and an entirely avoidable series of battles had taken place costing millions of lives.

Tolkien himself denied any allegorical context of his writings. But in this instance i think he'd forgive a likening to nationalistic greed. Fair trade, individual rights and freedoms. Bonds of friendship and honour. These are all things that cross borders and bind humanity together despite cultural differences.

If we close our borders, our hearts and our minds, barring our gates, we do so at our own peril. Now more than ever our politicians need to be mindful of the small actions. The seemingly insignificant little occurrences that may, if unchecked, lead the world down a very very dark path. I hope I am proven wrong. I hope this is nothing more than a period of peaceful change in the ever spinning tale of the human race. But will not assume it to be so.

The "alternative facts" that are being espoused from Trump's Whitehouse sow seeds of division, dissent & distrust. In so doing they "muddy the swamp" of truth verses propaganda or spin. Even the words "alternative facts" speak of a regime in love with its own image of itself. The twitter accounts of dissenting departments of the US government being shutdown over trivialities like the numbers of supporters at the inaugurations. This is deeply, deeply troubling. The information itself is banal, but the draconic control measures are quite the cause for alarm.

Lastly, there is now a Federal challenge to Donald J Trump for possible impeachment as he has  repeatedly failed to divest himself fully of his business assets and interests. Something it would not have taken the intellect of Sir Ian McKellen's Gandalf to foresee. Keep in mind that the shadow of extremism stands behind Trump. Not Muslim. but Christian. Mike Pence. Vice President to an administration that is seemingly intent on destabilising the Arab/Israeli situation.

Ask yourself "Why" ?

We are one nation -- We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny

"We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in every hall of power.

We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world -- but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.

We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones -- and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth.

There should be no fear -- we are protected, and we will always be protected.

We will be protected by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement and, most importantly, we are protected by God.

Donald J Trump. 45th President of the USA.

The "Trump Card" a modern day Trojan Horse? 

As for the Trump/Pence domestic agenda I'll leave that for another time. Until then stay #stubbornlyoptimistic, for it is needed now more than ever. I'll leave you with yet another Gandalf/Ian McKellen Quote:

"All we can do is decide what to do with the time that is given to us"

T'ill next time...