BFTP: Memo to old white dudes (political)

If you don't want to read anything politcal from the Blue Skunk, just skip right over this one. It's a re-post from Canadian Doug Jamison's Geezer Online (now defunct it seems) with a few personal reflections added below. While this was written 8 years ago, somehow it resonates with me more today than it even did then. If you care about the world you leave your grandchildren, read on...

Don't say you weren't warned. But it is just too good not to share...

Memo to old white dudes

Hey, you've accomplished a lot. Provided for your family, made sure the kids got an education, paid your taxes, kept your nose clean, and socked away enough for a decent retirement.

You were the guys everyone depended on to get it done, without fussing and without expecting anyone to make a big deal over it.

But I am tired of hearing you growling that we ought to eliminate social programs for single moms, kids living in crime-ridden neighbourhoods, jobless teens, impoverished seniors, newly arrived refugees, and others who are struggling to make a life in difficult circumstances.

Please stop sending me those vitriolic eMail messages that continuously circulate around the internet, usually ending with "If you don't pass this on, you are part of the problem."

Please stop saying, "If we could make it, why can't they," as though 2012 is like 1972.

I happen to know, because I am one of you, that our generation enjoyed the most amazing run of good luck ever seen in modern times.

Most of us grew up with two parents, and our moms were homemakers. Our streets and playgrounds were safe. In high school, we were not surrounded by drugs, gangs, and weapons.

We were provided with access to affordable higher education. Upon graduation, most of us could choose from several jobs.

Our working years coincided with a period of enormous economic growth and prosperity. There were no wars, so our careers were not interrupted by military service, or death. It was also a period of hitherto unknown mobility, so we could live and work wherever we wanted.

We lived in a stable, relatively classless, democratic country, filled with widespread optimism about its own future.  Our [Canadian] healthcare system ensured that we would never go bankrupt due to illness or accident. If we were smart and worked hard, the opportunities were almost limitless.

Hell, who couldn't make it in that environment? As someone said to me recently, "We won the lottery!"

So, you guys need to lighten up because, frankly, you're coming across as a bunch of crybabies.

Canadians like to think of themselves as the good guys, fair-minded, civilized. But this mean streak has taken root, and seems to be thriving. Or maybe it's just that I hang out with a lot of old white guys, and the rest of society isn't talking this way.

In most societies, elders are focused on being good stewards, ensuring that future generations enjoy the best possible future. Here it seems mostly about lower taxes and making people pay for their mistakes.

Look, I know all old white men don't think this way. I also know there are no silver bullets that will solve all the problems of 21st century society, and that many folks bear much of the responsibility for their predicaments. Not staying in school, getting pregnant too young, failing to save enough for retirement are all dumb moves.

But letting those lives continue to spiral down without offering a hand up will come back to bite us in the longer run with more crime, more jails, more police, higher unemployment levels, more homeless people and panhandlers on our streets, more drugs in our schoolyards, and general erosion of our quality of life.

So, whether you're doing it for humanitarian reasons, or to ensure a decent future for your grandchildren, you need to be part of the solution. 

Mr. Jamison's last line struck a chord with me - the bit about ensuring a decent future for one's grandchildren. Grandchildren are what politics should really be about. Here are two of mine from a few years ago.:

These, as you can probably tell, are pretty lucky boys. Clean, well-fed, healthy, and secure. They have a loving family and are getting a good education. Family values include responsibility and hard work and caring for others. Odds are they will be successful in whatever economy and society we leave for them.

But one never knows. Someday of these guys or someone they care about might need help. An illness. A job layoff. A bad business choice. I always think that in the same-sex marriage discussion that I have no horse in that race. But one day I might. Who knows? I want to make sure there is the proverbial "safety net" set and social policies in place by our government. Just in case.

I want these boys living without the aid of government assistance but knowing it is there. I'd like them to get an education at a price that doesn't wind up being like a mortage without the house at age 22. I'd like us to stop spending as a government more than we take in. I want everyone to be given incentives to work and for everyone, including the rich and not-so-rich, to pay back into society for the benefits they recieve. I think we should look hard at how we spend our health care dollars, especially on old goats like me. 

I was struck by this observation by conservative columnist David Brooks, in his column "Thurston Romney Howell" NY Times, September 17, 2012

...Romney knows nothing about ambition and motivation. The formula he sketches is this: People who are forced to make it on their own have drive. People who receive benefits have dependency.

But, of course, no middle-class parent acts as if this is true. Middle-class parents don’t deprive their children of benefits so they can learn to struggle on their own. They shower benefits on their children to give them more opportunities — so they can play travel sports, go on foreign trips and develop more skills.

People are motivated when they feel competent. They are motivated when they have more opportunities. Ambition is fired by possibility, not by deprivation, as a tour through the world’s poorest regions makes clear.

We all need to be a little less selfish, as the Geezer, suggests. If for no other reason. our own grandchildren will be happier and more successful in a society in which everyone is successful and happy.

And I approve of his message.

Original post 9/19/12

Analyzing old role models

If asked who my most influential role model was growing up, I would have to admit it was Bond, James Bond.

Dr No, the first Bond movie, was released in 1962 when I was ten years old. Luckily my aunt had (I believe) a crush on Sean Connery so she took me to every Bond movie that came out. A local drive-in theater would hold special "dusk-to-dawn" showings of triple features of Bond movies. At that age, I could even stay awake all night. Over the years, I've watched all the Bond flicks - even the agonizingly bad ones with Roger Moore. 

Ah, James Bond. What young farm boy would not want to be like him? His manly good looks, hairy chest, sensitive eyes, witty repartee, mischievous smile, and Scottish burr. His ability to fight, to make love, to drive fast cars, to scuba dive, to infallibly  fling his hat on to the office coat rack. How he always overcame all odds and cut the bomb's wire the second before it would detonate.* His knowledge of wine, diamonds, and espionage gadgets. I didn't know what a martini even was in those days, let alone why one that is shaken rather than stirred might be better. Ah, to be the James Bond of Sac County, Iowa. One could only dream as one drove the tractor up and down the soy bean fields.

I practiced "Johnson, Doug Johnson" but it just didn't have the same ring. I didn't think my dad would appreciate an ejector seat in the pickup truck either.

When Connery, the original and best Bond, died last October, I decided to do a review of his Bond films, in chronological order of their release. So far, I've watched the first three.

And I am pretty horrified. 

Bond was a smoker. A drinker. While I saw nothing overtly racist, parts given to minority actors were minor or villainous (Dr. No and his henchman for example.) Lesbians were easily converted to heterosexuality (Pussy Galore). He didn't wear a seat belt and seemed to shoot first and ask questions later.

But his most grievous attribute was how he treated women, of course. One smoldering stare and any woman would gladly thrust herself into his arms and then his bed. If the glance didn't quite do it, a forced kiss would bring her about. Even office co-worker Miss Moneypenny was not exempt from his attentions. I learned quite early in my dating career that undesired physical attention was indeed undesired - and undesirable. I was a quick study.

The Bond of the 1960s would today be brought up on sexual harassment charges faster than he could drive his Aston Martin. As well he should be. Bond was (and is) a fantasy figure and even as a kid, I probably would not have wanted him around any female family members. Recognizing our societal norm shift on male/female relations I suppose I can attribute to 40+ years of on-the-job mutli-cultural/gender fair training. No, I was never singled out for special attention in this regard, but attended along with the rest of the school staff on professional development days. 

Old guys like me are often called out for lapses in politically correct language and behaviors. And for the most part, at least in my case, the corrections are usually needed. But I do hope younger folks remember that many of us must overcome views of masculinity that were formed in our most impressionable years.

And there are still times I wish I could have been 008.

* The last Mission Impossible movie Fallout 2018 has the same suspenseful use of the countdown clock being disabled only at the last second.

BFTP: Is school just practicing life?

In response to Seth Godin's manifesto, Stop Stealing Dreams: What is School for? back in 2012 I suggested 10 big questions that as educators we spend too much time avoiding and too little time discussing that deal with the purpose of education:

1. Should education be more than vocational training? If so, can or should schools measure how one's quality of life increases because one is more thoughtful, more skeptical, more creative, and/or more humane?
2. What is a good balance between learning content and learning processes? How much do I want my dentist to know about best established practices and how much do I want her to know how to keep learning new best practices?
3. At what age should a child be able to determine for himself what is in his best interest to learn? How important is exposure to a broad (and possibly irrelevant) range of experiences, opportunities, or ideas? If a child develops a passion for a topic early in life, should all her learning revolve around that passion?
4. To what extent do we honor individual learning styles and needs? Is learning how to deal with problems (a teacher or topic one dislikes, for example) an important part of education?
5. Should technology be used to support all educational practices or only those which are constructivist-based?
6. Should we insist teachers who are effective without using technology be required to use it? Yes, I really do think that is a necessary question, as unpleasant as it is for many of us.
7. Do libraries and librarians have a role in the era of digital information? Yes, I really do think that is a necessary question, as unpleasant as it is for many of us.
8. How many of us are less enthusiastic about libraries or technology but are simply excited about alternate ways of learning - and libraries and technology offer means to those ways?
9. What kind school experience do I want my own grand/children to have? How should that guide me as an educator?
10. How should educational organizations demonstrate their efficacy? If we don't believe in test scores, what do we have to show those who fund us that we are doing good work?

Increasingly I think about question 4 "Is learning how to deal with problems (a teacher or topic one dislikes, for example) an important part of education?" The most memorable challenges my own children dealt with in school were along the line of:

• What can I do about this teacher I dislike?
• Why do I have to learn this subject/take this class?
• How do I get others in my group project to do their work?
• How will I get everything I need to do done?

How are these questions much different than those we ask as adult workers?

• What can I do about this boss I dislike?
• Why do I have to learn this new work skill?
• How do I get others in my team to do their work?
• How will I get everything I need to do done?

What if the best education is simply one that gives us a chance to practice the skills we need to use everyday regardless of our profession or stage of our career? Is school a place to make "safe mistakes" from which we can learn? 

Oh, my standard answer to my children when asking some of the questions above was "Formal education is primarily a weeding tool used by society to determine who is willing to play by the rules, willing to conform, and willing to delay gratification. For those people, there will be a place in an ordered work environment that is somewhat secure." 

Original post 9/5/17