The Little Dog Came From You

Yeah, I admit it.  Calling your dog your child is pretty irritating to me.  I hate to be one of those parents, but I am. (For the record, I was that kind of person before I was a parent.) I grew up around lots and lots of animals and we called them pets, or cattle or fowl or the horses - what have you; we didn't call them people.  But that is beside the point, really.

I have been struggling to figure out how to respond when someone likens their "son" (dog) to my "son" (not dog) as in: "My son (dog) got me up in the middle of the night last night to pee!" My son (not dog)  got me up in the middle of the night, too: for a wet diaper, and to nurse and then to be put back to sleep. And my other son (not dog) kept me up the first half of the night, I terrified, because he is a teenager and well, that is life with a teenager (not dog). "Can you believe these children?" (your dog/ my not dog). No, I can't. These children, humans, little souls, astound me every day.

I mean, I appreciate the sentiment and the love, so I don't want to be inhumane to the 'animal people'. So, I mentioned it to a friend. What to do?  How do I hide my disdain?  How can I be more open and tolerant and appreciative of this boarding-on-disordered-personality* doglove?

I thought she hadn't heard me until later when she said, "Hey! I took my animals to the Santa Cruz beach boardwalk this weekend.  Want to see a picture of them on the roller coaster?"  Best response ever.

*Cluster A: Odd or eccentric behavior / Cluster B: Dramatic, emotional or erratic behavior / Cluster C: Anxious behavior.  See? 

How About a Thank You

John Stewart: Patron Saint of Liberal Smugness   

This pretty much sums up perfectly my longtime feelings about Jon Stewart and most self-described liberals that I run across these days - which is fairly often, this being the Bay Area and all.

"Many liberals, but not conservatives, believe there is an important asymmetry in American politics. These liberals believe that people on opposite sides of the ideological spectrum are fundamentally different. Specifically, they believe that liberals are much more open to change than conservatives, more tolerant of differences, more motivated by the public good and, maybe most of all, smarter and better informed....And Mr. Stewart, who signed off from “The Daily Show” on Thursday, was more qualified than anybody to puncture this particular pretension. He trained his liberal-leaning audience to mock hypocrisy, incoherence and stupidity, and could have nudged them to see the planks in their own eyes, too. Instead, he cultivated their intellectual smugness by personifying it."   

Follow the above link for this very thoughtful piece from the NY Times.

And while we are on the topic, particularly in light of Stewart's take on race and violence and his call to face our "depraved" racial history, I think it is important point out how truly fatiguing it is to listen to people whose superiority on issues is at odds with their actions*. A particular cringe-worthy expression, which one hears all too often in certain circles, is the claim "I don't see race".  Oh really? Because that kind of makes you sound racist. Sorry. There is a lot you are not seeing if you don't see race.  Especially as a white person. I suspect that this is where Stewart was coming from in this much publicized problem with Wyatt Cenac. We all, as white - specifically liberal - Americans are at a risk of  this very same thing: of not recognizing our capital and power and, if criticized and defensive, we are at an even higher risk of revealing what lies beneath.

So in light of The Times piece, isn't it just a simple truth that self reflection requires some real generosity toward whomever is on the other side? This remains the problem I have with Stewart and his legions of fans:  detractors, whether they are conservatives, opposing network talking heads or peers and colleagues who disagree with your position, cannot simply be dismissed as stupid, sensitive, cultureless and oblivious. You have to understand the perspective of other people in order to truly understand yourself and the impact you are making on the world - even if, like Stewart, you claim it is not your job.  Particularly as a public figure, even if satire is your game, it should be a weight that you carry, knowing that what you are putting out into the world - even if it is fake news, or "perspective" news -  may be is the primary source of influence for many, many people.  It is your job, perhaps more than anyone else's, because it is like parenting, where your actions and words completely and totally inform those who aspire to be like you... whether you like it or not.

*If you listen to this full clip entitled "Stewart Eviscerates Stewart", it fits perfectly with Alexander's critique of Stewart's self-effacing yet aggrandizing approach that tends to mock his detractors rather than offer any real self reflection or demonstrate to his audience how to be even the least bit contrite.