Hello, friends. Well, all this talk about negative people and difficult situations and those who try to spread their misery seems almost in preparation now for the current issue: A nationally-recognized journal has suddenly decided to print a rebuttal to a "harsh" book review.

That doesn't sound so bad. What's the big deal?

Well, in journalism there's this thing called professional ethics. A publication that requests an article or essay of a given writer is obligated to protect that writer. It's taught in even the most basic of college classes. So, in the event that say, a book review or movie review or some other opinion-based article, like an editorial, finds an unhappy customer complaining about content--what the newspaper or magazine or journal will typically do, to protect themselves and the writer, is to publish a small blurb explaining that what is written in their book reviews, movie reviews or editorial sections are opinions not necessarily shared by the publication. Sometimes, you'll see a magazine print a brief synopsis of a general complaint about an article--never one attacking a particular writer--and provide an answer to the quandry. This is far different from printing a full rebuttal attacking a particular writer. Why? Keep reading!

Part of those professional ethics aren't just about dealing with liability, it's about preventing censorship. When censorship is allowed to happen in these United States, well friends, we may as well close the door completely on democracy. Oh, it's happened many times throughout history--book-burning being one of the biggest offenders. But Watergate was right up there, too.  Yeah, being compared to Nixon is every Editor's dream....

Censorship is just another form of bullying. It's bullying people into silence. It's telling other people who may want to speak out, that if they do, they'll be bullied, too. That's what printing a rebuttal means. It's equivalent to putting a piece of duct tape over the writer's mouth.

But what if the writer is allowed to answer the rebuttal? Okay, so even if a writer is willing to put themselves out there again, the fact that a rebuttal was printed lends a kind of credence to the complaint--it legitimizes it, puts a shadow of a doubt about the writer's professionalism in the minds of the audience. No matter what the writer might answer, that writer has already been villified. That's why professional ethics in writing is so important.

And so, when the book review editor of this particular journal saw the rebuttal, and saw how it might diminish the reviewer professionally--this book review editor pulled the rebuttal. Okay, great--problem solved. If only....

No, I'm afraid that the book review editor's boss saw the omission, and fired the book review editor. Isn't that incredible? In 2010, that kind of scape-goating is STILL happening???  Once again, all the truest things are the saddest things.

You may wonder why I called the firing "scape-goating"? Scape-goating is what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany--somehow, some way, every single Jew both within and out of Germany's borders, were the reason for every problem in the world...especially Germany's problems. It wasn't that Germany had started WWI and was stripped of their military and monies by the other countries involved...no, couldn't be. The Jews were to blame! Those same Jews were less than 1% of the German population when Hitler came to power in 1933. Those same Jews fought bravely beside their German friends and neighbors in WWI. But they were the easy target, a minority target. That's why they could be bullied, censored...and what came next? Twelve-million deaths.

Look at Rosa Parks. Same thing. She wouldn't leave her seat on the bus. Why was she asked to? She was sitting in the "white" section. In 2010, that whole scenario seems totally absurd. Hate to tell you, it was absurd in 1955, too. A 40+ year old lady was arrested and jailed because she refused to leave her seat. That was nothing more than bullying. Arresting her, putting her in jail? Censorship. The same thing happened in 1946 with Irene Morgan and in 1944 with Jackie Robinson.

Unfortunately, this writer and the noble book review editor don't have Martin Luther King to organize a boycott. 

That's why everyone--all of us--MUST speak out against the atrocity of censorship, of bullying, of scape-goating. We used to have this thing called Freedom of Speech. And you'd be right to think that a rebuttal is a part of that very same freedom. No one is suggesting rebuttals shouldn't be written, read, or taken seriously. But printed in the same publication...without the writer's consent? That's not about freedom, that's about quashing freedom. And any respectable editor should know better.

For shame, for shame....

Evil. The word conjures images of a horned devil with prehensile tail or of movie villains like Freddy Krueger. Some may think of men like Hitler, who reigned terror on Earth through a mass murder of millions...all because those millions were "different." Maybe your thoughts turn to HP Lovecraft's 1926 fictional creation, Cthulhu (who, by the way, has a "Homepage of Evil" at cthulhu.org where a campaign is running for Cthulhu's Presidency...). No matter what image the word "evil" evokes for you, it probably doesn't include your neighbor, your postman, or one of your co-workers. That's because humans tend to de-personify "evil."

Why? Simple: WE are evil. What better way to distract from the truth than by making up ludicrous monsters like Friday the 13th's Jason. Hockey masks never quite looked the same again. Or Freddy Krueger. Knives, anyone?

No, the greatest "evil" is done by man--just look at our planet. We're kiling it. And why? Because it makes life more comfortable for us. Not convinced that's evil? I understand. How about shoving calves into tiny huts to restrict movement so they never develop muscle...and the purpose? Again, human comfort. People want their veal tender, you know. Still not convinced? How about this: You kill yourself to do a good job--you sacrifice time with family, friends, work hard at earning the right credentials, gaining the best experience, and then, you get fired after spending 20 years working toward a professional goal. And not because of downsizing. No outsourcing need apply. YOU get  fired simply because YOU'RE different. You (and your difference) make the other people you work with "uncomfortable." But maybe that's not enough either. Here's another one: Because you're a woman, the men you work with treat you like a secretary--even if you're not--they ask you to get them coffee, expect you to do more work for less pay, and are constantly suspicious of you because of it. Okay, okay--not hitting the right note--I've got more: You're in college, working on a big project that makes up most of your grade in a particular class. One of your peers steals your research, passes it off as her own. You lose the grade because though there is evidence in your favor, the professor now has a shadow of a doubt cast over the whole situation--wrongly believing there are two sides to every story, and imagining that the two of you worked together at some point then parted ways--because it's easier to imagine that, more comfortable, then saying to one or the other of you, "You're a cheater."

You're wondering why I'm coming up with these scenarios when there are obvious evils like murder and rape--and yes, those are evils committed by humans, too. But evil doesn't start with murder. Evil begins in simple things. Things like cheating. Things like bullying. Things like prejudice. 

We wonder why the world seems so crazy these days. Yet the answer is remarkably simple: As a society, we've begun to devalue our humanity by accepting things we shouldn't...things like evil in everyday life. 

Think about it for a moment. Did you lie today? Even a small one? Did you cut someone off on your way to or from work? Did you silently mouth an obscenity to another driver or make a lude hand gesture...it doesn't matter--you don't know that person anyway, right? And, you felt better after you did it, didn't you? As long as you feel better, more COMFORTABLE, well then, everything is just fine. Just fine....

I live in a glass house like everyone else--so I can't really throw any stones. Sure, I try to do good each day, try to help at least one person. I smile at strangers, say hello  to people I don't know, and make friendly conversation with grocery store cashiers, always letting them know I appreciate how hard their job is. My daily goal is to not spread misery--even if it means my own discomfort. I suppose my "enlightened" position comes from having to deal with a constant stream of difficulty for most of my life. But even so, I'm no where near perfect. I get angry. I get frustrated. The key to recognizing where true evil begins isn't by beating yourself up--it's by acknowledging it in yourself and others each day. Know you, and everyone around you, have the capacity to spread misery to otherwise happy individuals. That is not listed as one of the cardinal sins, but it should be. Because spreading misery is where evil begins.

And you'd imagine that spreading misery would be uncomfortable--that somehow, there'd be no joy in it. But it's not about joy--it's about COMFORT. Always about comfort.  When we hurt, it feels good, comfortable, to know others are hurting, too. Even if we have to force that hurt artificially by spreading our own messy misery.

Evil is winning in our world and will continue to win. Each day, we allow evil to reign, wittingly or not. You don't need a fancy philosophical explanation of evil to understand. You don't need to believe in Hell or prescribe to a particular theology either. All you need is to look beyond yourself and your own comfort...just for a few minutes. If you can do that--and it's hard to do--you can begin making a conscious effort to stop spreading misery. 

The truth? The only thing that exists is sacrifice for others. That's all. It's the ONLY meaningful thing we can do with our rather short physical lives. You can't sacrifice every moment of every day--you must care for yourself before you can care for others--but that's on a day-to-day basis. You can't think, "Well, in fifty years I can start thinking about it...." That thought--right there--that's evil. 

What evil lurks in the hearts of men? You don't need the Shadow to find out. Just look in the mirror.

That's right, Twi-hards, Truebies, and other vampy wanna-bes...my SuperNatural sons are calling you out! Or, at least the writer of this week's episode of Supernatural. Which is really super. But not terribly natural.

The world, it seems, has gone vampire-crazy. And I don't use the word "crazy" lightly.

The episode opens with a young girl in a dark bar--very Bella Swan-like--sitting across from a mysterious Rob Pattinson-esque young man telling her to run away, telling her he's dangerous--in that broody, Twilight-vamp sort of way. And this play on Twilight was done with deliberation. Either director Jan Eliasburg or writer Brett Michaels read my chapter in Twilight & Philosophy, or it's just a big, fat coicindence that the episode was all about real life teens and tweens looking for their Edward...and instead finding nothing more than a blood cult and death. Oops.

I thought "Live Free or Twihard" was a brilliant visual to what my chapter, "The Real Danger," discusses--in the context of Supernatural's fictional world, of course. Speaking of which, in case you're not a fan--Supernatural is a 21st century version of the cowboy adventure: Two brothers on the road, looking for trouble. The Winchester boys are as American as apple pie--what with their trunk full of guns and all. Yeehaw!

Today I was lucky enough to have met an academic colleague on her campus, a small liberal arts school with an excellent reputation. Our conversation turned toward the popularity of vampires in, well, everything. I first theorized about why "superheroes"--even ones with fangs--were gaining momentum in the 21st century in Tom Morris's Superheroes & Philosophy (2005). The appeal of hyper-heroism stems from fear, frankly. We started the 21st century with death, destruction, and the introduction to terrorism on American soil. Never mind the fact that the rest of the world has had to deal with all of that ad infinitum, and so has the States--but in a much different way. The generation who fought in WWII is on the wain. Those brave souls who fought in the Korean and Vietman wars are now retiring or are already retired. The up-and-comers of the new "adult" generations have NEVER had to deal with the kind of terror 2001 brought. People my age fought in the Gulf war but people the age of my students have been in Afghanistan and/or Iraq since 2002. And that's terrifying in and of itself. But then add in a crashing economy, joblessness, and a general uncertainty about the world, and you've got a recipe for vampires...pretty ones, who sparkle in the sun and can get away with murder because, of course, they're vegetarians.

The monsters have become our saviors because the humans around us are letting us down. What does it say about a society who values the dead like that? What does it say for our children, that the fascination for fanged-death has become a literal phenomenon...not just in the States either, but all over the globe?

Tonight's episode of Supernatural addressed just that question. Because in real life, those vampy chat rooms where you pretend to be a bloodsucker to meet others like you is nothing more than a playground for pedophilic-freaks. The dangerous looking boy who's tall, dark and brooding isn't Edward Cullen--he's your future stalker who will hurt you, maybe even kill you according to recent Department of Justice statistics.

"But it's all in good fun," you might say--except when it's not. Like when you have to hide out in a friend's closet because your stalker followed your car and is now banging down the door, screaming he's going to kill you--the very same guy who took you to a nice dinner, sent you a dozen roses, and kissed you tenderly just a few days before--is now a psychotic nightmare who won't leave you alone...until you're dead, or he is. Think I'm kidding? Think I'm some removed writer/professor whose middle-class life has sheltered her from that sort of thing? Think again.

I was Bella--a smart yet under-confident teen who met an older, good-looking guy who practically sparkled. He said all the right things, did all the right things--even his possessive behavior seemed endearing, until he tried to kill me.

Do you know what it's like to have to fight for your life? If you did, you wouldn't be swayed by Edward Cullen or the other fanged-friendlys pop culture is normalizing in an "I'm okay, you're okay" scenario. There are now degrees of evil. It's okay if you're a murderer if the person you murdered was "bad." It's okay to hurt people as long as you have pure intentions.

I have a secret: IT'S NOT OKAY. EVER.

And these are our heroes!?!? Vampire Diaries Damon Salvatore kills Elena's brother--sure, in that fictional world, Jeremy was wearing a special ring that could revive him from supernatural death...like when a vampire breaks your neck. How the ring knew a vampire broke Jeremy's neck is the real mystery...but an even bigger one is how Damon is portrayed as a good guy who just kind of loses his way when he loses his temper. A "WTF" moment, as my students would say, if ever there was one.

But hey, I love vampires, werewolves, the mummy, Frankenstein--always have. Those "classic" monsters were portrayed as more human than the humans around them. Sadly, I think I related to monsters more than people. I've always been a sucker for the under-dog, and classic monsters used to be the under-dog. Today, they're the heroes. And today's heroes suck, literally.

Escapism is great. And there's nothing wrong with losing yourself in one of Stephenie Meyer's or LJane Smith's or Anne Rice's books. Just remember when you close that book, that reality looms large just a few feet away...like the weird guy in the parking lot who seems to be looking for victims, sitting in his car alone, window cracked, smoking a cigarette, just watching...you. There's your Edward Cullen. Go get him, girls! Exciting, isn't he? He'll get you so excited, you'll feel your heart race faster than it ever has before. You'll feel more alive...as you run for your life. You'll die everytime you hear the sound of his voice in your ear...as he screams obscenities at you and your friends in the middle of a crowded restaurant because he followed you after work, and you didn't even know it.

Don't confuse the "real" monsters for actual monsters...there are no monsters that exist who aren't human.

Do you know why perfectly sane, well-adjusted, educated people go insane? I do. Those people are like Jesus; they have some new idea, speak some kind of truth, or otherwise embarass others through their virtuosity. And even though they may not look like Jesus or be particularly religious--or even Christian--someone is always trying to nail them to a cross. Always. They can't get away from it. Life almost becomes an absurd string of human abuse. The upside? Those Jesus-like individuals understand Camus a whole lot better....

So what happens if you're like Jesus--always being persecuted for who you are, simply because you exist. In fact, your existence negates other people's beliefs in some way. Maybe you survived when you shouldn't have. Maybe you thrived despite difficulty. Whatever it is, it's not you--truly--it's them.

Yes, there are always two sides but that doesn't mean that the negativity isn't one-sided. Criminals say they are innocent, even with the bloody knife dripping in their stained hands. MacBeth anyone??? No? Then how about a little "Et tu, Brute?"

I've written before about how to deal with negative people. There's just such a preponderance that it seems possible to talk about in a myriad of ways without redundancy. Such a sad statement...because it's true. It's also true that Jesus was resurrected after being crucified. He was a phoenix. Oh, everyone thought he was dead--they even buried him! But even death couldn't stop him. And it's the same for you.

You don't have to be a believer to agree with what I'm saying. It's not really about Jesus so much as the example he set. Your friends, your family, your co-workers, even random people from your community--all can call you out to their individual crosses. And though it's painful, though it makes you wonder about the nature of reality and existence--you still live. And every time you survive, you become that much stronger, that much smarter.

You evolve.
 
Unfortunately, the more you evolve, the less likable you are to other humans. Something about the expression in your eyes, or the way you hold yourself, or perhaps it's that innate sense of authority you've developed from being crucified and resurrected once too often--whatever it is, every time you take a step, you walk in truth. And it's a truth most people will never even glimpse. Not once. That's why you're like Jesus. You know while others can only guess.

The irony? You know because of them--because they, and their cruelty, exist.

I'm not saying it's easy. It's not. And I'm not even sure how long you can live with that kind of burden and not lose your mind, your health, or all of the above. You start to feel like an over-used battering ram at the hands of war-mongers. And no matter how enlightened you become, you're still human. It still hurts. And that's a good thing. Because you can start to lose your humanity amidst the spread of the miserable. Evolution goes both ways--it's a continuum. I'm writing to tell you, all of you--any of you--that you're not alone. You're in very good company--divine even. Hang in there. When you're being unjustly crucified, remember who you are--even if others don't, can't or won't.

You'll live to see the sun rise. You'll live to see many. In fact, you'll make an impression on the world that will have eternal ripples in our universal pond. YOU--not them. They'll just be lumped in with the crowd, part of the mire that holds humanity's evolution to a crawl out of fear and desperation.

Essentially, you've become an immortal. Congratulations! It's not as glamorous as pop culture makes it out to be, is it? But it all starts with one grain of rice. You can feed a nation on what you've learned. 

"Now Voyager, sail thou forth to seek and find!" 

Zack Snyder directed the latest 3D animated film adaptation to hit theatres, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole, from the novel series by Boston-based writer, Kathryn Lasky. Snyder, best known for directing 300 and Watchmen, and future director of the next films in DC's Superman franchise, takes the audience on a magical flight to mastering two worlds, our own, and the eerily similar one of the owls. With classical hero myth expertly woven into visual range, Snyder & Co. bring Kathryn Lasky's compelling characters to life.

The story is a familiar one: Brother against brother, the emerging hero in an inescapable entaglement with the emerging villain, there is dragon-battle, ritual death and dismemberment, talismans, companions, and a threshold guardian who turns out to be something more. The story is set in Australia; with lots of Aussies lending their talents like Sam Neill and Ryan Kwanten, the authentic accents and beautiful imagery add to the magical realism portrayed in this 90-minute masterpiece.

Good triumphs over evil, of course, after a heated battle. And the Guardians get to safely and peacefully live in the Tree once again, protecting the sick, doing good and fighting for what is right. Like Adams' Watership Down, O'Brien's Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH, or Jacques' Redwall, Legend of the Guardians portrays an animal society where evil lurks, grows and is ultimately defeated, but only after the reluctant hero crosses the threshold into the wider world.

I particularly liked how Lasky and Snyder make a point of showing their young audience that, sometimes, in order to do what is right, you have to fight hard battles that leave you scarred, changed, but the world will be better for it. And, the scars are easier to live with than tyrannical evil. Sound familiar? I wish it were more so...and not just in the movies.

On the Housel-scale, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole is a 10/10. It's PG because very young minds may be affected by the battle-violence toward the end of the film, but the film has been in theatres in the States for a month now and has grossed well over $40,000,000 for a reason. See it. The story sends the "right" kind of message to people of all ages through a beautifully animated film that effortlessly glides the audience to the fantasy world Lasky created in her original novels.

First, let me welcome the more than 1,100 new readers in the last five days. And of course, welcome to all my consistent audience--you've been giving my words meaning for many years now. I'm grateful today, and always.

One of my readers with her own blog recently sent me a tweet about how my work on social justice was quoted on multiple related blogs, including one that expresses skepticism on the Twilight phenomenon. Why? One of my chapters in Twilight & Philosophy: Vampires, Vegetarians and the Pursuit of Immortality (Wiley 2009) discusses how the concept Stephenie Meyer uses in creating the fictional situation in her Twilight novels is eerily similar to the "reality" of having a male stalker, who ultimately, becomes intimate with his victim before killing her--a sad statistic that was on the rise in 2005, the year Meyer came out with her first novel. In the chapter, I refer to having personal experience in this area--not as a stalker, but as the victim.

The problem isn't with Stephenie Meyer or Twilight; it's with the audience. Why are we so eager to romanticize love relationships with the "bad boy"? And why are women fascinated by dangerous men? Do we deserve the patriarchal scrutiny we've had to deal with ad infinitum? Or are we merely brainwashed by the prevalent discourse of the dominant social group--and girls, that's not us....

I live with men. And I have many male friends and colleagues. I'm not a man-hater--in fact, it's just the opposite. The way I think and behave are often classified as more "male" than "female." I'm decisive, action-oriented and straightforward. My instinct when there's a problem is to hash it out in person, face-to-face....mano-a-mano, as it were. I grew up pretending to be Tarzan, Zorro, and Wolverine. I played with guns, swords and read comic books. And yes, I even got into a few minor scrapes here and there--but there was never any grudge. Once it was over, it was over. I climbed rocks and tramped around the woods. I broke more bones than I had dolls. But I did have dolls. I did wear pink. And make-up, and I still do. But I was fearless and confident--and apparently, the gentle, gentile socialized picture of a soft, sweet girl--a girl I wasn't--was a disappointment to many. But it doesn't mean I wasn't taken in by the hype...please! I was a teenager in the 80's...the era of John Hughes. Pretty in Pink? Claire in Breakfast Club? Ione Skye and John Cusak in Say Anything? Demi Moore in St. Elmo's Fire? Interestingly, when I look backward at the "boys" I was "attracted" to, I realize that I wasn't so much attracted to them as much as I was to the IDEA of them--the idea that popular culture insisted into my hormonal, pre-pubescent consciousness, the idea reinforced by the behaviors of other women in my life...and men. I was to be a secretary--because I'd only get married and have babies anyway--despite the fact that my two career interests since I could talk included becoming a dentist and/or a lawyer. I was writing and selling my work as young as six. I was ambitious. I was intelligent. And I had lots of initiative. So why was the idea of becoming a secretary even introduced? I didn't even play house with my dolls! Usually, I dressed them up to be taken hostage so I could play Robin Hood or Zorro or Tarzan and save them.

It took me a long time to find my way out of the maze of gender-based social expectations--and I still struggle with it today. Down to our very language, women are objectified, marginalized and pushed into "otherness." There is no equivalent of a male-whore. There is no word for a male-slut. Men are congratulated, still, for sexual promiscuity. Women are thought of as "cows," or creatures from which you can "purchase" "milk" through marriage or otherwise simply try to get it for "free." We still hear that phrase in common usage. In 2010. 

Chattle. That's what women were considered until 1920. 1920! Less than a lifetime ago? You betcha. Statistics show that women make less money than their male counterparts, still. Women hold MANY less CEO positions, Senate seats, seats as Supreme Court judges...or just judges in general, and are still far-less represented in fields like medicine. The States has NEVER had a female President. The closest we've come was a choice between a moose-killing beauty queen or a pant-suit wearing control-freak with a bad hair cut...and by the way, these sentiments are not mine--they are taken right out of the media. You never heard that kind of criticism of President Obama, Vice President Biden or Senator McCain. Do you know that even Pakistan has had female leadership? And forget about the context of Abrahamic religions--the most prevalent theologies in the Untied States. Women's bodies are meant for male-legislation--whether it's abortion or stem-cells. Still. In 2010.

And this isn't debatable, though most men reading this will undoubtedly balk at the idea that patriarchy is alive and well with retorts like, "I have a female boss," or "my sister is in med school." Those facts don't preclude the body of evidence otherwise. Do you know that the World Health Organization (WHO), declared violence against women a PANDEMIC? Now, tell me women are equals. I know it's hard to swallow--believe me--but we're not. Not really. And those women who do claw their way to power often have to adopt a kind of viscious ruthlessness to do so, something they seem to apply, in large part, toward their female inferiors.

My uncle, a wonderful, totally non-patriarchal supportive person, asked me about "otherness" this weekend, commenting on how using it as an accepted term is actually buying in to the marginalization. And I agree. I think that using terms like "heroine" for a female hero or "actress" for a woman-actor is ridiculous. I'm not a "shero" or "heroine"--I'm a hero, like any other person. Most foreign language has definitive forms built-in to their structure that indicate the feminine or masculine. And unless there is a MAJOR sea-change in the global social climate, that will NEVER change. And neither will the marginalization of the female gender.

The bottom line is: Different IS NOT deficient. Women ARE powerful--we have babies while connecting everyone and maintaining households and going to school and working and feeding our families. We have a higher tolerance for pain. We can endure more physical trauma. And, because we are resourceful, and feel so connected--we live longer. Some people are frightened by this--and fear's twin is hatred, otherwise known as misogyny. It's why menopausal women in the 17th through early 20th centuries were given "hysterectomyies"--because, you see, they were acting "hysterical" and female dogs given hysterectomies appeared to be calmer after the procedure. Don't believe me? Look it up. Of course, if the hysterectomy didn't work, there was always lobotomy.... 

Any recent progress you can point to in equality was hard-fought, hard-won and continues to be each and every day. So yes, I am concerned with social justice. As should anyone with a mother, wife, sister, or daughter in 2010. The word "feminist" has become a badge of nuttiness, of zeal, of lunacy. Even amongst women. And, it's because of the undercurrent of patriarchal discourse that permeates our culture, and consciousness--equally--from birth. Feminists are often referred to under the veil of humor as "femi-nazis." Really? You're comparing a call for equality to genocidal maniacs? Really??? 

That's part of the frustration. There are men who "get it" but there are many others, like many women, who don't. And why? Because they have all been brainwashed to believe that society mainly moves in one direction, despite tweaks here and there; the status quo is good, fine, solid, and all-in-all, the American way. Mediums like Twilight perpetuate that party-line, as do many, many, many other pop culture influences--like the fact that most Hollywood actresses are sizes 0-4 yet the average American woman is a size 14 or higher--at least 60% of us, girls! And fat, sloppy (even old) men can marry gorgeous, young, thin women on TV and in films, but it's NEVER the other way around. Never.

I can yell and scream until I'm blue in the face but none of it will sink in very far. 

How could it? I'm only a woman, after all.



 

Isn't that a great quote???  It's a pop culture reference (The Simpson's) from Supernatural's Season 4, the episode called "Sympathy for Satan." Dean Winchester, played to the hilt by Jensen Ackles, says that line to one of God's "angels." In the Supernatural series, God's angels are anything but cherubic.

How many times have you wanted to say something similar? Be honest. Maybe not to one of God's angels...but then again....

It's healthy to express anger, disappointment, frustration--but in constructive ways. In ways that bring you closure but also, don't really hurt anyone. Shows like Supernatural fit the bill in such cases. The audience can vicariously be "heroes" through Sam and Dean...and through lines like, "Cram it with walnuts, Ugly...."

But when a TV show or movie or really great rock song doesn't cut it, how do you safely express your feelings without breaking social decorum?

It's an ironic question to ask--if YOU are feeling anger, frustration or disappointment, it's probably because another individual, or group of individuals, didn't care about appropriate social behaviors. Which is EXACTLY why we love characters like Dean Winchester so much; he has a mouth, and knows how to use it. But Eric Kripke, creator of the Supernatural concept, who is also working on an animated series spin-off for TV for January 2011, is the real genius behind Dean Winchester's wit and witticisms.

None of us are as lucky as Dean Winchester--if everything we said was scripted, we'd never have to worry about sounding stupid, or missing an oppotunity to make a really good quip, or being stunned into silence when faced with an absurd reality. The trade-off is free will. We have the liberty to think and feel what we want, even if our mouths don't have that same option. But why don't we give our mouths that same life, liberty and justice? The answer is commodification.

That's right. No one who needs to earn wealth by self-commodification can afford to burn any social bridge. The people who can are usually in positions of power or strength through corporate sponsorship, like with a boss or supervisor in the workplace, or citizen sponsorship, like Hollywood celebrities, musicians, reality TV-stars, politicians, and congregation-dependent religious leaders.

I've talked about this before--how we become vulnerable through self-commodification, even though it's a necessity of 21st century life. And there's no definitive solution to such a problem, which is part of the reason why pop culture venues like Supernatural are so...well, popular.  The best way to solve this kind of existentrial dilemma is through self-responsibility: Don't abuse people. It's the bottom line in Kripke's creation as well--the place where reality and fiction meet.

But many individuals, weakened by constant sacrifice throughout a lifetime, use any power gained--even just being a customer in a retail store--as a way to express their anger, frustration and disappointment. It's not fair. It's not just. And it's not right.

We all have to work hard to be better people each and every day. Once in a while, you might slip. Acknowledge it appropriately and move forward. But we simply can't continue to hurt others with (witting or unwitting) deliberation on our search for closure from the misery inherent in our own lives. 

Sometimes, you might find yourself involved with an individual who just gets under your skin, meaning, for no apparent reason, you just don't like that person. Be mature enough to recognize that you are the problem in that instance and walk away.

Self-responsibility is all about mindfulness. With our enlarged egos, we sometimes believe we are better people than we actually are. If you halted introspection, even for a moment, than you may be in danger of losing perspective on others...and, yourself.

Though it would be wonderful to tell a deserving foe, or just some rude jerk in a mall parking lot, "Cram it with walnuts, Ugly," it's never right to abuse others. It's never right to hurt people--verbally, emotionally, or physically. To safely express your anger, disappointment or frustration, use a journal, make regular appointments to talk to a counselor or therapist, and/or begin putting that negative energy into hobbies like painting or gardening. Moderate physical excercise five days a week for 30 minutes a day (a brisk walk in your neighborhood would do it) is enough to help control the stress you may feel when less-mindful individuals forget about social decorum.

It can be difficult to continually be "the better person," especially if you receive hearty helpings of negatives within a short span of time, like the loss of a job, of a spouse, of a friend, a difficult health diagnosis, or dealing with a major transition, like a move to a new city. Ultimately, you're not doing it for anyone but yourself. By expressing your feelings in a constructive, non-critical way, you can live a healthier, better, more fulfilling life.

Everyone has a choice...everyone.