My Birthday Wish

I normally blog a couple of times a month, and since this one is coming out at the beginning of February, the next one will be right after my birthday, on February 14th (Valentine's Day). Given that I'm a cancer survivor, it seems amazing to me that I'm about to be 77. Many of my relatives did not live to be 77. So, as I have said many times, I am grateful every day.

All my life, I've always been honest about my age: for generations, women were told to never admit to how old they actually were, but that custom mystified me. It seemed to play into the belief that only a young woman had value, and if a woman wasn't what society considered young, then she was expected to lie. But why be ashamed of how old we are? Why lie about it? So, yes, God willing, I'm about to be 77. People tell me I don't look it, and I guess that's a good thing-- although I don't know what a 77 year old is supposed to look like. I just know that's how old I'll be, and yes I understand that in a youth oriented culture, 77 is considered old.

And that is about to become a problem for me. As many of you know, several months ago, I received the disappointing news that 29 of my colleagues, including me, were being laid off: and the median age of those who got that email skewed over 50. Many of us are widely known, have won awards, are names in our field, and our students like us. But on paper, I guess we're considered old, and thus more expensive than younger faculty. And as businesses all over the country seek ways to save money, older personnel are being encouraged to take buyouts or they're being downsized.

So, while I am grateful to be alive, I'm facing the fact that it may be difficult for me to find another job. No, I don't want to retire: I enjoy working, and I can't imagine not doing it. (And I've been told I'm still good at it, so I'd like to continue.) Not only does having a job keep my mind active, but the income lets me pay my share of the bills, and have enough money to donate to the charities I care about. 

But will anyone see what I have to contribute? Will they see all of my accomplishments thus far and think that I still have plenty more to offer? Or will they just see someone who is 77, and figure it's easier, and cheaper, to hire someone younger? No, I'm not trying to overstay my welcome, and I'm not trying to prevent a new generation from having their chance. Ideally, it shouldn't be "us versus them": there ought to be room for both the younger and the older generations, since each has important perspectives, and each has different experiences to share.

And if I have a birthday wish, beyond another year of health, I wish for the opportunity to keep making a difference, the opportunity to be judged not by my chronological age (or the stereotypes about it) but by what I've done already and what I still can do. I truly believe there's more out there for me to accomplish. To be honest, the odds don't seem to be in my favor right now, but I know that things can change. I hope they will. And I hope that soon, my birthday wish will come true.      

When Bad Behavior Seems to Get Rewarded

It should come as no surprise to those who read my blogs that my politics tend to lean center-left. On some issues, I'm more center-right, but in general, I'd have to say yes, center-left. However, I have many friends and colleagues who do not share my politics, and that's okay. We can agree to disagree and still be friends. We can find common ground on some issues, and put the rest aside. But heated arguments, name-calling, and insults just aren't my style. Yes, I can be passionate about what I believe, but I've never understood the need to mock or demonize folks who don't see things my way. And while I enjoy winning a debate, I don't see the value in turning everything into World War III.

I grew up in an era when political discourse could be intense-- as the fictional Mr. Dooley said back in 1895, and many modern politicians have since repeated, "Politics ain't beanbag." But I didn't grow up in a world where rudeness and unkindness were rewarded.There were norms: politicians could be snide or sarcastic, but vulgarity was frowned upon, and so was mocking how someone else talked. If a politician cursed in public, that was considered a no-no. So was making threats against your opponent. And if you lost an election, no matter how hard-fought, you accepted the loss and either ran again or did something else with your life. 

Okay, fine, times changed. But sometimes I wonder if things changed for the better. Radio, which used to feature announcers who were like your best friend, began airing angry political talk shows where name-calling was the rule, rather than the exception.On TV, cable news brought us lots of information (and exciting visuals), but it also brought us partisan commentators who cared more about generating outrage than sticking to the facts. And in politics, the tone of some candidates went from intense and passionate to conspiratorial and mean. And the other party wasn't just your opponent-- the other party was evil and needed to be destroyed. 

And when I was growing up, Evangelical Christians took the scriptures seriously. They would never have supported a candidate like Donald Trump-- someone who had been married three times, had cheated on his wife with a porn star, used vulgar language on a regular basis, frequently lied, mocked people with disabilities, and advocated for policies that not only showed little empathy for the poor but, more often than not, were uncaring and even cruel.

But in Iowa, a deeply religious state, white Evangelicals came out in large numbers to support the former president, and that has been the trend in other states as well. Perhaps they are willing to put aside their previous views because he supported policies they liked (such as bringing about the end of Roe v. Wade); but this still seems very transactional to me. Either you believe in ethics or you don't. I always thought Jesus said love your neighbor, feed the poor, give shelter to those who are less fortunate. But the candidate they support so faithfully believes none of those things; in fact, he believes quite the opposite. There is even a video circulating that implies he was chosen by God Himself, but no matter how many rationalizations are offered, I still find such devotion mystifying. 

I'm sure some of you are upset with me for writing this. I'm sure that some of you believe that the former president deserved to be re-elected. I can respect that belief; everyone has a favorite candidate, and supporters want to see that person win. But what I cannot respect is a candidate who uses hatred and bigotry in his speeches, and encourages others to do the same. What I cannot respect is someone who refuses to accept that he lost an election, and who continues to mislead his supporters about it. Call me old-fashioned, but I'm accustomed to leaders who bring out the best in people, not leaders who seem to enjoy bringing out the worst.    

And yet, here we are. As I write this, it's the King Holiday, when we commemorate the birthday of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. Earlier today, I put a favorite quote of his online, from 1967: "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.” But tonight, after the results of the Iowa caucuses, I wonder if some folks believe love is overrated, and that political power matters more. I hope that's not true nationwide. I hope that this isn't a sign that people want a leader who is cruel and autocratic, as long as he gives them permission to hate the right people. I hope more people will stand up and say "no" to that kind of politics, no matter which party they're from. But right now, I have no idea if they will, and that's what worries me.