#I know how there is a constant attempt at radicalizing the community against another community

[buttercuparry]

See I don't know if I should support the ban of The Kerala Story or not. On one hand it acts like a catalyst that further tries to incite hate and divide on communal and religious lines. It absolutely is a propaganda in a atmosphere where islamophobia is rampant and where the nationalist hindutva freaks are constantly looking for anything and everything to justify their hate. But my question is won't this ban be politicized and used as "see! They want to hide something! That's why they are suppressing our voice and banning the film under the guise of secularism!" Etc etc. Besides what about a free media? But then again after what people have done with The Kashmir Files, where the violence that happened was exaggerated and the exaggeration then got used to instill a feeling of being at war with a religious community, it doesn't take much to conclude that the Kerala story too is a work of the same political genre. So I personally don't know what to say. Like in the US you have copaganda. Is it better to ban those shows? Or to let it run but form your own educated decisions.

Can it even be compared because in India it is a propaganda against a community and the resulting boiled over pots would be riots and targeted assaults on the people of the community

[nouraalali]

The Progress of LGBT representation in American

Before the events of Before Stonewall that took place in 1969, members of the gay, lesbian and transgender community endured constant attacks and harassment from police raids. At the time, members of the LGBTQ did not know that their sexuality had political implications or that there would ever be a new way of life other than in hiding in shame and wishing the police did not attack them. However, since there was little to no media coverage at the time because the LGBTQ community was not yet identified and categorized, the media did not spend their time, technology, and space covering their events in footage or writings in newspapers or magazines. During the early 1960s, even the word lesbian hardly surfaced in mainstream conversations. Gayism, on the other hand, was considered slang, and the term homosexual had not been coined at the time. The first known use of the term homosexual was in Charles Gilbert Chaddock’s 1892 translation of Richard von Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis, a study of sexual practices. During the 1960s, there was old-fashioned homophobia that revolved around homosexuality, and this would explain why there was little to no media coverage of such topics by the media despite the LGBTQ community's continued harassment by members of the police force. The grassroots riots by the drag queens, butch lesbians, male sex workers, and androgynous youths were deemed so insignificant that neither the Life magazine nor the Time magazine dared to cover them. Even the three main TV stations at the time bothered to send camera operators to record the riots.

In 1969 at a dingy, Mafia-owned bar in Greenwich Village, the LGBTQ community reached a breaking point due to their continued harassment by the police. Unlike previous raids, on this day, they refused to be herded into a police van for their umpteenth arrests. This was the beginning of a six-day route that started in Stonewall Inn to Christopher Street and the neighboring areas.

With such an outbreak, the media could no longer turn a blind eye to the LGBTQ community. The media coverage started helping the public visibility of same-sex sexuality. By airing and publishing interviews and protests of famous LGBTQ members, the public started to accept same-sex orientation as part of their societal sexual preference, and names like gay and lesbian were not as frowned upon as before. The media made it easier for the LGBTQ community by increasing same-sex orientation's visibility and perceived legitimacy. At the time, the idea of being LGBTQ had begun to gradually weaken the predominance of the heteronormative discourse and the formation of homonormative lessons. This means that the media was at the forefront of portraying how gay and lesbian individuals should appear and behave.

Identity Politics and Impact of Grassroots Organization in Redefining the Status of LGBTQ

The post-Stonewall gay liberation movements restored radical energies seeking to align politics with radical social change in American society. Legendary activists such as Barbara Gittings from Philadelphia and Franck Kameny from Washington DC understood that there needed to be a radical change that was big enough to overturn the laws that kept embers of the LGBTQ stuck in their second-class status. After the uproar of the Stonewall resistance, it became a symbol that would inspire solidarity among many homosexuals’ groups worldwide. While historians agree that the Stonewall riots were not the first to initiate the gay rights movement, they agree that it did serve as a catalyst for a new era of political activism, especially those campaigning for equal rights for members of the LGBTQ.

Historians recognize older groups such as the Mattachine society founder in California and flourished in the 1950s. Lilli Vincenz and Frank Kameny, two members of the Mattachine Society of Washington, participated in the discussions, planning, and protection of the first Ride along with activists in New York. Additionally, the Mattachine were enlisted as stalwart Cold Warriors, and they used these anti-communist credentials to push for citizenship rights. However, since the riots, new groups appear such as the Gay Activists Alliance (GAA) and the Gay Liberation Front (GLF). These groups launched numerous public demonstrations whose main goal was protesting the lack of civil rights for members of the LGBTQ. Although the lesbian community was not as affected as the gay community, they shared the desire to have a secure place in the world community at large. Unchallenged by the fear of violence, they ganged up with the gay community to voice their desires for equal treatment under the law and their unwillingness to be considered second-class citizens. These alliances, in many cases, resulted in such tactics as the disruption of public meetings and public confrontation with political officials to force them to recognize members of the gay community. Unlike before, when gay protests were frowned upon by both the media and the public, members of the gay community demanded respect and acceptance after the Stonewall uprising. Many gay and lesbian communities’ members demanded equal treatment in employment, public policy, and housing. Through continued radical activism, a new motion was set in place, one that discourages discrimination against members of the LGBTQ by government policies. I

t was not until December 1973 that the vote to remove homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual was cast, and the motion passed. Historians consider this one of the most significant early achievements of the post-Stonewall LGBTQ movement, especially since the new law undercut all forms of discrimination against members of the LGBTQ. The nondiscriminatory trend was also forced to educate society on the significance and contributions of the gay community. In response to their activism, any jurisdictions in the United States enforced laws banning any form of discrimination against homosexuals. They also increased the number of employment and agreed to offer "domestic partner" benefits similar to life insurance, health care, and in some cases, pension benefits to heterosexual married couples.

AIDS Crisis in Redefining the status of LGBTQ

In the United States, AIDS was particularly prevalent in the urban gay community, especially during its first discovery phase. For this reason, the public developed a somewhat negative perception of lesbians and gay individuals. Although there were not publicly prosecuted, bt members of the lesbians and gay community were singled out and discriminated against, particularly because they were blamed for the transmission of HIV. Gay and lesbian couples were losing their loved ones to this new disease that only seemed to affect the gay and lesbian community; it drove a shockwave of fear of death from contracting the disease in the community. As a result, there was an increased stigma, violation of human rights, discrimination, and physical violence against members of the LGBTQ. Most of the LGBTQ members at the time adopted "social homophobia." They unknowingly contracted and lived with the virus for fear of societal discrimination whenever they thought of testing or healthcare treatment. One research reports that due to this "social homophobia," members of LGBTQ exhibited adverse mental issues such as depression and anxiety, and many were driven into substance abuse and addiction.

For this reason, gays and lesbians were at the forefront of advocacy for research into the disease and the provision of better support for its victims. One such group recognized for this effort was the Gay Men's Health Crisis located in New York City. AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP), founded by Larry Kramer, was another group that actively campaigned to promote political action against the disease through his writing in local chapters in cities such as Washington D.C, Los Angels, Paris, San Francisco, and New York.

Many members of ACT UP were sick with the virus themselves, and they engaged in civil disobedience in protest for increased research on HIV/AIDS in the attempt to find a cure for the virus. Activists such as Kramer made good use of the media when they established AIDS organizations. These organization's central role was to increase media exposure on the risks that members of the LGBTQ were facing as well as encouraging them to come out in huge numbers to fight for their rights. Through such organization and media coverage, it forced the government and private drug companies to pursue research that led to the discovery of ARVs as a treatment for HIV/AIDS and saved the lives of not only the gay community but infected heterosexuals as well.

References

Butler, I. (n.d.). This remarkable history of the fight against AIDS is a guide to the battle yet to come. Slate Magazine. https://slate.com/culture/2016/12/david-frances-how-to-survive-a-plague-reviewed.html

Corry, J. (1985, June 27). Film: Documentary on homosexuals (Published 1985). The New York Times - Breaking News, US News, World News and Videos. https://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/27/movies/film-documentary-on-homosexuals.html

Heiko Motschenbacher, H. (2019, November 18). Language use before and after Stonewall: A corpus-based study of gay men’s pre-Stonewall narratives - Heiko Motschenbacher, 2020. SAGE Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1461445619887541

History. (2018, June 1). How the Stonewall Riots Sparked a Movement | History. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9wdMJmuBlA

Holden, S. (2013, February 20). They wouldn’t take no for an answer in the battle against AIDS (Published 2012). The New York Times - Breaking News, US News, World News and Videos. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/movies/how-to-survive-a-plague-aids-documentary-by-david-france.html

John-Manuel, A. (2019, June 14). Film: "Before Stonewall" Explores LGBTQ pain and resilience. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/stonewall-strong/201906/film-stonewall-explores-lgbtq-pain-and-resilience

Lecklider, A. S. (2021, June 10). The push for LGBTQ equality began long before Stonewall. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/06/10/push-lgbtq-equality-began-long-before-stonewall/

Weiss, A. (2019, June 30). Creating the first visual history of queer life before Stonewall. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/06/before-stonewall-documentary-archives-history-invisible/592675/

Winik, M. (2016, November 28). David France’s eyewitness account of AIDS activism. Newsday. https://www.newsday.com/entertainment/books/how-to-survive-a-plague-review-david-france-s-exhaustive-history-of-aids-activism-1.12667430

[flickeringart]

Existence

Life is undoubtedly a setup. It’s obvious if one looks at it from an astrological perspective. One is born and destined to play out the patterns dictated by the natal chart, one can’t separate the self from the dynamic energies represented by the planets or the characteristics represented by the signs. They are one’s primary blueprint so to speak, with inbuilt challenges and blessings. One goes through different phases where certain natal planets are triggered and affected and one enters into relationship with other people who’s natal planets causes awareness of aspects of ourselves. It’s thrilling and exciting to dig into the symbolism and psychology of all of it, but it’s also a bit uncomfortable – because it reflect things so accurately and it maps things out so clearly – even the confusing and diffuse dimensions of experience. It appears to explain certain things but it really doesn’t, it merely reflects what is going on and nothing more. It can be used as a tool for increased awareness about things that aren’t spelled out in concrete terms in one’s life, or to put it more accurately, is not noticed even though it’s spelled out clearly enough. What I find is most valuable is to increase my understanding of myself and people, to be able to see what they’re striving for, what they value, what they need and how they communicate. But also what their weakness and defenses are, what wounds them or how they assert their will. It makes me feel safer, to know that everyone is patterned differently and it’s just the way things are. It makes me more ok with the badness and the goodness and all the in between – in myself and in the world. It helps me suspend judgement.

Astrology is so rich and complex and as already stated, a gold mine for anyone that’s interested in the exploration of existence. However, I don’t think astrology or existence should be taken too seriously. Planets are like deities and will behave in their particular fashion. They are like empty vessels with a certain purpose. They’re not self-creating, they are only expressing energy in the way they’re designed to. They’re all separate agents and belong to the thought system of separation, to the part of the mind that is anti-unity. Even Neptune, the planet of return to ”universal bliss” is not a symbol of true reality. All planetary forces and symbols are anti-life as they are separate components playing parts that are designed to not go beyond their specific function. For example, Mars’ function is to assert, to radiate potency, to promote direction and movement. There’s nothing that Mars can do that will make him different than he is. His function is to fight and face resistance and he will go no where beyond that state. To use another example, Jupiter’s function is to bring energy and life, to expand, to explore and stimulate excitement. Jupiter is on a continuous high of ”what’s next?” and won’t ever arrive beyond that state. In a sense, one could say that planetary energies are dead principles with no active creative factor other than their inbuilt complex patterning. It’s like this with everything in existence I imagine, everything seems to be creative, but really it’s just a complex programming that is categorized as ”creative”. Humans are designed to have an element of mystery and unpredictability as is demonstrated by Neptune and Uranus in our charts – however it’s the planets’ fixed function to generate the experience of inspiration or insight. There’s no genuine creativity at work stemming from the divine – it’s all just a part of the game.

I picture existence to be a bit like Plato’s cave metaphor. Shadows made by puppets should not be taken for reality. The puppets in my meaning would be the thought system that is the foundation for separation – the shadows would be the various forms in our world of separation. The thought system itself is not reality, it’s a defense against it. Images of reality are not reality but a replicas – imitations that have no real resemblance to life, yet is taken for life in the mind’s confusion. The fake reality is not evil per se – it’s nothing when the mind is returned to it’s natural state, it’s nothing in reality. But, when the mind is deeply invested in the shadows on the wall, caused by a thought system that is a defense against the truth, there will be pain and suffering – and there will be evil. In reality, freedom that has no opposite is all abiding. In this world of shadows, freedom is the distance in time and space from imprisonment, which is not real freedom. Existence is an attack and a denial of truth. Distance from threat means safety here. Distance from war means peace. Yet, threat and war is the constant actuality and it can’t be transcended. Or can it? I ask because some people actually try and some claim to have succeeded. Then there’s the pressing philosophical question of who is trying to transcend the world? Who or what is the self that sets out on such a mission? Is the self even real? One starts to go deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole...

People like to come up with all sorts of solutions to existential pain. By existential pain, I mean the overall setup of life as we perceive it through separation and contradiction. Some try to deny that there’s any problem with the way things are. They take an attitude of radical acceptance and seek to embrace the good with the bad, seeing the necessity in both polarities. This is a coping mechanism that establishes illusion as reality and upon facing the cognitive dissonance of it, the person tries to glamorize it to live somewhat happily in a world of pain. Some try to numb their senses, some try to actively escape or compartmentalize the good and the bad in order to not be overwhelmed by the gloom and doom of it all. Some try to project the picture of perfection into the future, keeping hope alive but never really arriving at a place of completeness. There are millions of ways to cope and keep defenses against reality intact under the guise of wanting freedom. In my experience, nothing that is attempted to undo something that one think is real ever works because the mind can’t destroy something it depends on for security. If one has a hard time deeming this world evil, it’s because one thinks that certain bits and pieces are bright and good. Not many are willing to paint their precious world black, but they fail to see that it is already black – unforgivingly pitch black.

Through complete realization of this, there’s real peace. I’m not sure a realization of truth can be pursued because it can appear in a instance and be gone the next. The process of becoming is futile, because there’s only darkness and light, no stages in progression from dark to light. There’s nothing that can be gained in darkness that will lead to the light. The progression that is perceived to be made over time is an illusion, a setup of events from start to finish that mean nothing in reality. Yet, I’m sure that most people experience instances of completeness. In fact, all instances are complete, but as time and space seems to enter, salvation is temporarily cancelled out and one is thrown back into existence. It’s rediscovered again, when suspension of judgement takes place spontaneously for some curious reason. We’ll all release and be released in time, when time is seen to not be needed anymore.

[projectawe]

Sex, Seduction, and Secret Societies: Byron, the Carbonari and Freemasonry

By Dr. David Harrison, PROJECT AWE SCHOLAR

The eighteenth century was a period which witnessed the development of English Freemasonry as a social phenomenon, with the society undergoing constant transitions, modernizations and rebellions.  The society had split into two main rival factions in 1751, with two grand lodges existing, the Moderns and the Antients, and as a result the society expanded, with Masonic lodges by both organizations being founded throughout England, Europe and the American colonies.  The influence of the society on artists, writers and free thinkers was immense, and this paper will examine the influence of the Craft on one particular writer and revolutionary, the Romantic poet George Gordon Byron, the 6th Baron Byron.

George Gordon Byron (fig. 1) was born in 1788, and is regarded as a leading figure in the Romantic movement as well as one of Britain’s greatest poets. Byron also became known for his scandalous lifestyle, aristocratic excesses, and sexual and social intrigues, but even though he was not a Freemason, he did, as we shall see, have rather deep rooted connections to the society. After the publication of his first epic poem Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage (fig. 2) in 1812, Byron was, for a time, the toast of Regency London; he was elected to the most exclusive of gentlemen’s clubs, he had affairs with desirable women, an affair with Lady Caroline Lamb led to her to label him with the immortal line ‘Mad, bad and dangerous to know’. Byron also took an interest in the same sex and was also rumored to have had an affair with his half sister. The scandals, rumors and gossip led to him leaving England for good in 1816.

Freemasonry certainly fascinated another writer who was linked to the Romantic movement; Thomas de Quincey, also known as the Opium Eater after his auto-biographical work that detailed his addiction to laudanum. De Quincey wrote the Origin of the Rosicrucians and the Free-Masons which was first published in January 1824, a work that attempted to examine the origins of these entwined secret societies. Though de Quincey was not a Mason, like Byron, he was aware of Freemasonry, the history and the nature of secret societies providing a profound interest. De Quincey, like the poets William Blake and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, also drew inspiration from the works of Emmanuel Swedenborg, the Swedish visionary who later lent his name to the Masonic Swedenborgian Rite.[1] Freemasonry certainly attracted poets such as Robert Burns, a Scottish Mason who is often observed as a pioneer of the Romantic Movement.

The Poet and artist William Blake was also influenced by Freemasonry in his artwork, incorporating what can be interpreted as Masonic themes in works such as Newton and The Ancient of Days.[2] Another writer and friend of Byron’s who was a Freemason was Dr John William Polidori (fig. 3). Polidori was Byron’s personal physician who wrote the short Gothic story The Vampyre, which was the first ever published Vampire story in English. The story was based on Byron’s Fragment of a Novel – a story composed at the Villa Diodati by Lake Geneva in Switzerland in June 1816, during the same time Mary Shelley produced what would later develop into Frankenstein. Polidori became a Freemason in 1818,[3] his story being published the following year.[4]

The ‘Wicked Lord’

Byron’s  great uncle, the eccentric fifth Lord Byron, had been Grand Master of the ‘Premier’ or ‘Modern’ Grand Lodge from 1747-51, and it may have been through him that the poet developed a familiarity with the themes of Freemasonry. As we shall see, Byron mentioned Freemasonry in his poetry, and commonly celebrated classical architecture in his work, discussing the many Temples of antiquity.  Byron, who had been on the Grand Tour, continuously praised the lost knowledge of the ancient world, and in his epic poem Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, he attacked Lord Elgin for his plunder of the Parthenon, and expressed the hidden mysteries held within the classical Temples:

‘Here let me sit upon this massy stone,

The marble column’s yet unshaken base!

Here, son of Saturn! Was thy favourite throne:

Mightiest of many such!  Hence let me trace

The latent grandeur of thy dwelling-place.

It may not be: nor even can Fancy’s eye

Restore what Time hath labour’d to deface.

Yet these proud pillars claim no passing sigh;

               Unmoved the Moslem sits, the light Greek carols by.’[5]

Byron’s great uncle, the ‘Wicked Lord’, hosted regular ritualistic weekend parties on his estate Newstead Abbey, in a somewhat similar fashion to Sir Francis Dashwood’s Hell Fire and Dilettanti meetings at West Wycombe.  The ‘Wicked Lord’ was a rather clubbable gentleman, being involved in an aristocratic dining club which met in the Star and Garter Tavern in London.  However, true to his wild nature, he killed his neighbor William Chaworth during an argument, who was also a fellow member of his club, resulting in a murder trial in the House of Lords in 1765.  He was eventually found guilty of manslaughter and, after the payment of a fine, he was a free man, though as a result of the scandal became a recluse, living in debt with his mistress in the decaying Gothic splendor of Newstead Abbey[6].  He certainly had a profound influence on his heir, the inheritance of the Gothic Abbey supplying a haunting and melancholy inspiration to the poet.

According to H.J. Whymper writing in AQC, the ‘Wicked Lord’ had been a popular and a somewhat charismatic Grand Master, and his absence during six out of ten Grand Lodge meetings was attributed to being on business out of the country.  During his term as Grand Master he showed none of the temper or eccentricity of his later years, and the minutes of the Grand Lodge during his office revealed a Grand Master who was far from ‘Wicked’[7]. Whymper was indeed sympathetic to Byron’s Grand Mastership, and dismissed Gould’s view of the ‘Wicked Lord’, Gould having written that ‘the affairs of the Society were much neglected, and to this period of misrule, aggravated by the summary erasure of numerous lodges, we must look, I think, for the cause of that organized rebellion against authority, resulting in the great Schism.’ Gould clearly placing the blame for the formation of the ‘Antients’ with Byron.[8]  Whymper put forward that Byron’s image was certainly tainted after his conviction of manslaughter, leading to his ‘unpopularity’ being ‘improperly seized upon to account for the dissensions in the Craft…’[9]

Lord Byron, Don Juan, the Carbonari and Revolution

Byron was certainly aware of Freemasonry, though he mentioned it only twice in his epic poem Don Juan. He first commented on the aristocratic networking aspects of the Craft in Canto XIII, Verse XXIV:

‘And thus acquaintance grew at noble routs

And diplomatic dinners or at other –

For Juan stood well both with Ins and Outs,

As in Freemasonry a higher brother.

Upon his talent Henry had no doubts;

His manner showed him sprung from a higher mother,

And all men like to show their hospitality,

To him whose breeding matched with this quality.’[10]

Byron seemed to be referring to the hierarchical system of Freemasonry, which at Grand Lodge level, was dominated by the gentry and led by certain charismatic aristocrats, Don Juan being portrayed as moving in well-connected and well-bred circles.  He then touched upon the Craft once more in Canto XIV, Verse XXII of the same poem, commenting on the more mysterious and secretive aspects of Freemasonry:

‘And therefore what I throw off is ideal -

Lowered, leavened like a history of Freemasons

Which bears the same relation to the real,

As Captain Parry’s voyage may do to “Jason’s.”

The Grand Arcanum’s not for men to see all;

My music has some mystic diapasons;

And there is much which could not be appreciated

In any manner by the uninitiated’[11]

The alliteration of the words ‘Lowered’ and ‘leavened’ gives an emphasis to the mention of ‘a history of Freemasons’, a Masonic metaphor suggesting a transformation of sorts. Byron also refers to the ‘uninitiated’, and how they cannot appreciate the mystical secrets of the ‘Grand Arcanum’ and thus will never find what was lost.

There is no evidence of Byron being a Freemason, but he was a member of the Italian Carbonari, a Masonic-like secret society which shared similar symbolism though had a radical political ethos.  Carbonari means ‘makers of charcoal’, though like Freemasonry, the secret society was of a speculative nature, and symbolically represented political and social purification, the brethren spreading liberty, morality, and progress.  Having left England in 1816, Byron entered into a self-imposed exile to escape the scandalous rumours and mounting debt. It was during his period in Italy that Byron wrote parts of Don Juan, the leading character also becoming entwined in secret societies and political and sexual intrigue.

The Carbonari shared similar secret symbolism with Freemasonry, and met in lodges which, like Freemasonry, conducted a ritual.  The Carbonari however were linked to militant revolutionaries in Italy who desired a democratic constitution and freedom from Austrian domination, and were the driving force behind the Naples uprising in 1820.  Byron, being attracted to the rich political intrigue and the Romantic idea of revolution, was elected ‘Capo’ of the ‘Americani’, a branch of the Carbonari in Ravenna, where Byron stayed between 1819 – 1821, buying arms for the cause and meeting with senior members of the conspiracy.[12]  Indeed, he writes excitedly of his Carbonari associations on February 18th, 1821:

‘To-day I have had no communication with my Carbonari cronies: but, in the mean time, my lower apartments are full of their bayonets, fusils, cartridges, and what not. I suppose they consider me as a depot, to be sacrificed, in case of accidents. It is no great matter, supposing that Italy could be liberated, who or what is sacrificed, it is a grand object – the very poetry of politics. Only think – a free Italy!!!’[13]

Another poet linked to the Carbonari was Gabriel Rossetti, whose revolutionary affiliations in Italy forced him into exile in 1821, and much later the Italian general Giuseppe Garibaldi became involved in the society during the early 1830s.[14] After their initial defeats of 1821, the Carbonari played a successful role in the July 1830 Revolution in France, but a subsequent rising in Italy resulted in failure and a government crackdown on the society ensued. By 1848 they had ceased to exist.

Byron subsequently became attracted to the Greek struggle against the Ottomans, and left for Greece in 1823. Taking up a similar role to what he had fulfilled with the Carbonari, Byron generously financing the Greek cause, paying for the so-called ‘Byron Brigade’ and arming the revolution. Byron found himself having to somewhat navigate the differing factions within the Greek cause, yet he embraced the war of independence wholeheartedly and was prepared to give his fortune in aid of the cause. However, Byron was to die in Greece of fever in April 1824 at the young age of 36. He is considered a National hero to the Greeks.

Newstead Abbey

If one knows where to look when visiting Newstead Abbey, the ancestral home of Byron, one can find Masonic symbolism, for example the guttering is decorated with the Seal of Solomon (fig. 4), although this dates from the occupation of Colonel Thomas Wildman, a Freemason and an old school friend of Byron’s from Harrow, who eventually purchased the estate from the cash-strapped poet in 1818. Wildman became Provincial Grand Master for Nottinghamshire, and was a close friend and equerry to the Duke of Sussex, who visited Newstead on several occasions.

Wildman constructed the Sussex Tower at Newstead in honor of the Grand Master, and improved the Chapter House as a private family chapel.  When Wildman died in 1859, the estate was purchased by William Frederick Webb, who had the chapel re-decorated, and in memory of Wildman, Webb had a stained glass window designed with the central Masonic theme of the construction of Solomon’s Temple (fig. 5), which may also echo the building work that Wildman undertook at Newstead.  Wildman founded the Royal Sussex Lodge in Nottingham in 1829, and there is also a Byron Lodge in the area which celebrates the Masonic links to the poet, his family and Newstead.  Masonic services are still held at the chapel by the lodge.

The Masonic symbolism displayed at Newstead, along with the Solomon's Temple scene on display in the stained glass window, would be instantly recognizable to the initiated, the power and status of both the ‘Wicked Lord’ Byron and Colonel Wildman within Masonic circles being vividly apparent.  A parallel to the Masonic themed stained glass windows and Masonic symbolism in the chapel at Tabley House in Cheshire can be seen here, with Lord de Tabley being the Provincial Grand Master of Cheshire during the later nineteenth century. There is evidence that Masonic services were held in the chapel. Lord de Tabley had a number of lodges named after him in the Cheshire area, including the De Tabley Lodge No. 941.[15]

The majority of English lodges in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, both Antient and Modern, met in taverns and Inns, but for a lodge to be deeply connected to a prominent local aristocrat, it was symbolic of status for that lodge to meet at his residence, providing a much more elitist and private meeting place.  The residences of these important Freemasons became a status symbol proudly boasting the owners Masonic beliefs through the display of symbolism and became an erstwhile home to local lodges, lodges which the owners controlled.  When fellow Masons visited the Hall, they could recognise the symbolism instantly, and also recognise the Masonic status of the owner.  Houses such as Newstead Abbey and Tabley House both celebrated architecture, with the Gothic of Newstead and the classical design of Tabley House, both houses also celebrating Freemasonry, with both aristocratic families becoming central to Freemasonry in their own particular area, serving as Provincial Grand Masters, and all founding their own prestigious lodges.  Newstead undoubtedly had a deep historic link to Freemasonry, and the additional feature of being the residence of the Romantic poet Byron would have certainly added to the status of the building especially amongst the more literary Masonic circles, as his reputation as one of Britain’s leading poets grew in stature as the nineteenth century progressed.

Conclusion

The poet Byron was certainly aware of Freemasonry and was attracted to the intrigue that certain secret societies offered, becoming a member of the Carbonari in Italy. His links to Masonry are certainly celebrated today with the Byron Lodge No. 4014 which still holds Masonic services in the chapel at Newstead Abbey, a lodge that also celebrates the Grand Mastership of the ‘Wicked Lord’ and of Colonel Thomas Wildman’s Provincial work in Nottinghamshire. Byron’s Masonic references in his poetry are few, however the Romantic themes of his verse certainly resound common Masonic themes of the celebration of ancient architecture and the search of what was lost. Perhaps in the end, Byron found his ultimate Romantic zeal in the cause of revolution, the Carbonari providing a society, like Freemasonry, filled with secret symbolism, but unlike Freemasonry, it supplied the poet with the passion of political change and the essence of Romantic revolt and rebellion.

Endnotes

[1] Polidori was a member of the Norwich based Union Lodge No. 52, Initiated on the 31st March 1818, Passed on the 28th April 1818 and Raised on the 1st June 1818.

[2] See John William Polidori, The Vampyre, (London: Sherwood, Neely and Jones, 1819). See also Peter L. Thorslev, The Byronic Hero: Types and Prototypes, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1962).

[3] See David Harrison, ‘Thomas De Quincey: The Opium Eater and the Masonic Text’, AQC, Vol. 129, (2016), pp.276-281. See also H.J. Jackson, ‘‘Swedenborg’s Meaning is the truth’ Coleridge, Tulk, and Swedenborg’, In Search of the Absolute: Essays on Swedenborg and Literature (Swedenborg Society, 2004). For the influence of Swedenborg on Blake see Peter Ackroyd, Blake, (London: QPD, 1995), pp.101-104. Ackroyd discusses how Blake eventually turned against the ideas of Swedenborg.

[4] David Harrison, The Genesis of Freemasonry, (Hersham: Lewis Masonic, 2009), p.97. See also Ackroyd, Blake, p.185-187.

[5] George Gordon Byron, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, (London: Charles Griffin & Co., 1866), p.54.

[6] The Trial of William Lord Byron For The Murder of William Chaworth Esq; Before The House of Peers in Westminster Hall, in Full Parliament.  London, 1765.  Newstead Abbey Archives, reference NA1051.

[7] See H.J. Whymper ‘Lord Byron G.M.’, AQC, Vol.VI, (1893), pp.17-20.

[8] Ibid., p.17.

[9] Ibid., p.20.

[10] Leslie A. Marchand, (ed.), Don Juan by Lord Byron, Canto XIII, Stanza XXIV, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958), p.361.

[11] Ibid, Canto XIV, Stanza XXII, p.385.

[12] See R. Landsdown, ‘Byron and the Carbonari’, History Today, (May, 1991).

[13] See Leslie A. Marchand, (ed.), Byron’s Letters and Journals, Vol. VIII, ‘Born for Opposition’, 1821, (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1978).

[14] See John Belton, ‘Revolutionary and Socialist Fraternalism 1848-1870: London to the Italian Risorgimento’, AQC, Vol.123, (2010), pp.231-253, in which Belton outlines Garibaldi’s Masonic career as Grand Hierophant of the Sovereign Sanctuary of Memphis-Misraïm between the years 1881-1882.

[15] See Harrison, Genesis of Freemasonry, pp.143-7.

Bibliography

Ackroyd, Peter, Blake, (London: QPD, 1995).

 Anon., The Trial of William Lord Byron For The Murder of William Chaworth Esq; Before The House of Peers in Westminster Hall, in Full Parliament.  London, 1765.  Newstead Abbey Archives, reference NA1051.

Belton, John, ‘Revolutionary and Socialist Fraternalism 1848-1870: London to the Italian Risorgimento’, AQC, Vol.123, (2010), pp.231-253.

Byron, George Gordon, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, (London: Charles Griffin & Co., 1866).

Harrison, David, The Genesis of Freemasonry, (Hersham: Lewis Masonic, 2009).

Harrison, David, The Transformation of Freemasonry, (Bury St. Edmunds: Arima Publishing, 2010).

Harrison, David, ‘Thomas De Quincey: The Opium Eater and the Masonic Text’, AQC, Vol. 129, (2016), pp.276-281.

Jackson, H.J., ‘‘Swedenborg’s Meaning is the truth’ Coleridge, Tulk, and Swedenborg’, In Search of the Absolute: Essays on Swedenborg and Literature (Swedenborg Society, 2004).

Landsdown, R., ‘Byron and the Carbonari’, History Today, (May, 1991).

Marchand, Leslie, A., (ed.), Don Juan by Lord Byron, Canto XIII, Stanza XXIV, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958).

Marchand, Leslie, A., (ed.), Byron’s Letters and Journals, Vol. VIII, ‘Born for Opposition’, 1821, (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1978).

Polidori, John William, The Vampyre, (London: Sherwood, Neely and Jones, 1819).

Thorslev, Peter, L., The Byronic Her: Types and Prototypes, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1962).

Whymper, H.J., ‘Lord Byron G.M.’, AQC, Vol.VI, (1893), pp.17-20.

Bibliography

Ackroyd, Peter, Blake, (London: QPD, 1995).

 Anon., The Trial of William Lord Byron For The Murder of William Chaworth Esq; Before The House of Peers in Westminster Hall, in Full Parliament.  London, 1765.  Newstead Abbey Archives, reference NA1051.

Belton, John, ‘Revolutionary and Socialist Fraternalism 1848-1870: London to the Italian Risorgimento’, AQC, Vol.123, (2010), pp.231-253.

Byron, George Gordon, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, (London: Charles Griffin & Co., 1866).

Harrison, David, The Genesis of Freemasonry, (Hersham: Lewis Masonic, 2009).

Harrison, David, The Transformation of Freemasonry, (Bury St. Edmunds: Arima Publishing, 2010).

Harrison, David, ‘Thomas De Quincey: The Opium Eater and the Masonic Text’, AQC, Vol. 129, (2016), pp.276-281.

Jackson, H.J., ‘‘Swedenborg’s Meaning is the truth’ Coleridge, Tulk, and Swedenborg’, In Search of the Absolute: Essays on Swedenborg and Literature (Swedenborg Society, 2004).

Landsdown, R., ‘Byron and the Carbonari’, History Today, (May, 1991).

Marchand, Leslie, A., (ed.), Don Juan by Lord Byron, Canto XIII, Stanza XXIV, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958).

Marchand, Leslie, A., (ed.), Byron’s Letters and Journals, Vol. VIII, ‘Born for Opposition’, 1821, (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1978).

Polidori, John William, The Vampyre, (London: Sherwood, Neely and Jones, 1819).

Thorslev, Peter, L., The Byronic Her: Types and Prototypes, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1962).

Whymper, H.J., ‘Lord Byron G.M.’, AQC, Vol.VI, (1893), pp.17-20.

About the Author

Dr. David Harrison is a UK based Masonic historian who has so far written nine books on the history of English Freemasonry and has contributed many papers and articles on the subject to various journals and magazines, such as the AQC, Philalethes Journal, the UK based Freemasonry Today, MQ Magazine, The Square, the US based Knight Templar Magazine and the Masonic Journal. Harrison has also appeared on TV and radio discussing his work. Having gained his PhD from the University of Liverpool in 2008, which focused on the development of English Freemasonry, the thesis was subsequently published in March 2009 entitled The Genesis of Freemasonry by Lewis Masonic. The work became a best seller and is now on its third edition. Harrison’s other works include The Transformation of Freemasonry published by Arima Publishing in 2010, the Liverpool Masonic Rebellion and the Wigan Grand Lodge also published by Arima in 2012, A Quick Guide to Freemasonry which was published by Lewis Masonic in 2013, an examination of the York Grand Lodge published in 2014, Freemasonry and Fraternal Societies published in 2015, The City of York: A Masonic Guide published in 2016, and a biography on 19th century Liverpool philanthropist Christopher Rawdon which was published in the same year.

[blackswaneuroparedux]

Anonymous asked: Do you have any tattoos? Piercings? If so, where? (You are an ex soldier)

The answer lies in your question. I was an officer not a soldier. Generally speaking British army officers - if they are from privileged backgrounds and most of them are in one way or another - don’t have any tattoos or piercings. It’s simply frowned upon.

Within the army officer corps there are one or two exceptions of course but I would suggest they had a tattoo after a crazy night of excessive drinks or some regimental or mission bonding ocassion. I won’t address the Royal Navy or the Royal Air Force as I’m not really qualified to speak about their traditions and customs with a degree of authority.

Tattoos done by the army rank and file is their business. It never bothered me when I served because I judged them by their proficiency to perform at the highest levels demanded of them. I respected them even if I had a personal dislike of tattoos.

I especially dislike tattoos on women - on men, there might be tasteful exceptions but not what I have seen - because to me it feels too plebeian and narcissistic.

Too often tattoos on a woman say two unappealing things to me: ‘hey, look at me! me! me!’ or it’s a latent cry for help. It’s not elegant nor is it classy. It’s rather naff and betrays a lack of taste.

If you are a woman and you have a special mantra for life, or belief, or saying that helps you get through the day, it’s perfectly fine to have it jotted down in a nice little book somewhere, not scrawled all over your forearm. Or worse on your back where you can’t even read the damn thing.

Tattoos are about self-expression I hear some plead. Really? To me it’s the ultimate desperate cry of ‘I’m so individual’. Look around. It has been said that roughly half of millennials have one, as do 36% of Gen Xers, according to a recent Harris poll done in the US. The number of Americans with at least one tattoo has jumped 50% in the past few years. I don’t know the figurs in the UK and Europe. If you insist on making a statement then perhaps it’s more original to have a pure, blank canvas.

Are tattoos artistic? Yes, perhaps some are, arguably. But your body is not a modern art installation.

Even beautiful artwork gets old. If you’d happily look at the Mona Lisa every day for the rest of your life, by all means go for that tattoo. But it’s a bit...well…boring. And naff.

And then there’s the vexed question of future employment. Employers in many white collar professions are naturally biased against people who are inked because it affects their brand. There may even be evidence that those who are inked may have a certain personality flaws.

People who have a visible tattoo are more likely to act in haste and to fail to think through the consequences of their actions, according to a study of more than 1,000 people. The 2019 study was done by Canada’s McMaster University which looked into why individuals would want to “affix a visible stigma,” given some employers' bias against body art.

Personally, I think such surveys can be nonsense given how doctored the research parameters are. But I do understand why many white collar professions woud make pre-suppositons about that person’s character. It may seem unfair but tough! That’s life. We don’t get a second chance to make a first impression. There are plenty of other professions and lines of work where someone inked is no barrier (like the army rank and file) so one is free to pursue those opportunities.

I just want to clarify about the obsession the millennial generation seem to have with tattoos as a means to express themselves. This needy pursuit of ‘identity’.

I recognise that tattoos, once “largely reserved for criminals, sailors, circus freaks, and exotic tribal societies” mantra, has undergone a rise in popularity and signifies a significant cultural trend in Western societies in recent years. But that’s not an argument to get inked. Rather it’s a judgement of how societies are declining into degeneracy and nihilism.

I do get it, especially why millenials are into it. For them tattoos may be important because, at their core, they signify a means of cementing the permanence of identity. It’s been argued that tattoos do more than merely showcase facets of an individual’s identity: rather, they anchor, cement, and stand for the entirety of that identity. Even when everything else about the world right down to the body changes, tattoos are constants. They assure a link to the past.

The need for that kind of anchor has been exacerbated by the overload of constant changes in the environment that millennials in particular are challenged with facing on the daily. Since millennials are more wired in that any other generation before them, their world is the one changing the most frequently. They say that millennials are constantly bombarded with the newest social media platform, the latest trends, and the newest films via phones, laptops, tablets, and various other screens day in and day out, moulding the demographic to adapt quickly to rapid change.

That said, all those changes can take a toll on the mind, and that it can be comforting for a millennial tattoo wearer to know that the design etched in their skin will remain with them forever.

But to me it shows how lost people really are.

It’s a comment how we have become untethered to the bonds of religious faith, family, and community. It shows a lack of sense of purpose through the destructive effects of atomistic individualism.

Getting inked to clarify who we are in terms of identity is just sad and ultimately self-centred. Because it’s the things outside of you and around you - institutions, faith, family, community, history, legacy, heritage etc - that ultimately define and shape you.

You have the choice of pursuing a ‘self-centred’ identity where it’s all about you or you can pursue a more humble ‘selfless’ identity that is about service and sacrifice. I would argue the latter gives you a more satisfying and durable purpose in life. 

I don’t have tattoos and would never ever consider getting one. I do have discreetly pierced ears for one pair of ear rings only but that’s it.

Radical or just boring, I know.

I expect I shall end up saying the same thing about myself as my grandfather once said when he was dismissive of his extraordinary acts of bravery and courage during war, “I used to be young and stupid. Now I'm old and stupid." I don’t need tattoos to remind me of these things in my old age.

Tattoos may indeed reflect bygone identity struggles but they never stay relevant forever. The tattoo is typically an attempt to make permanent that which is fleeting. Typically, feelings. In some way tattoos are feelings permanently inked. But feelings are something you have; not something you are.

What we are is the sum total of memories recalled, experiences had, stories shared, and wisdom passed on. What I shall be will always be permanently rooted in faith, family, and service.

Thanks for your question

[nettlestonenell]

So, you want to adapt Little Women for the screen.

There’s quite a challenge ahead of you, Gentle Readers. Might I help get you started?

What, you might ask are my own bona fides in suggesting that I might have the right to hold forth on such a topic? Very well, I first read Little Women in 1983. The first of countless times I have read it. Actually, I collect copies of it, and buy interesting ones whenever I see them. I’ve seen more than a few adaptations of it.

The cover of my first copy. A giant volume, it was highly impractical to carry around. I did it anyway.

An initial challenge, any screen writer will tell you, is sheer length. Little Women was originally published as two separate books. So, an initial novel, and a sequel. By 1880, the two volumes were forever published as one. 

Not only does this mean lots of pages and plot needing weeded out of your script, but it also means you’re going to have two climaxes and two denouements (seems about right for a female novel, yeah?), another challenge when adapting the two stories into a single film. (Imagine having to create a single story/plot from Philosopher’s Stone AND Chamber of Secrets). 

Inevitably, what generally happens in past adaptations is that Part II gets greatly compressed and short-changed (and I do not doubt, Gentle Readers, creates some of the dissatisfaction among viewers and fans where the handling of Laurie’s proposal and the latter adolescence of characters and their romances/mates don’t land as they might if spent more time with).

Actual illustration of Book One (on the left) and Book Two (on the right) once adapted for film.

According to Wikipedia: The book has been adapted for cinema; twice as silent film and four times with sound in 1933, 1949, 1978 and 1994. Six television series were made, including four by the BBC—1950, 1958, 1970, and 2017. Two anime series were made in Japan during the 1980s. A musical version opened on Broadway in 2005. An American opera version in 1998 has been performed internationally and filmed for broadcast on US television in 2001. Greta Gerwig is directing a new rendition of the novel, set to be released 2019.

I could not hit “Add to Watchlist” fast enough.

So, the list of folks attempting to tackle Little Women is a long one, and not always a successful one. Some elements of the story are always going to play well, and frankly, be hard to mess up too much. But others? Others have some real sticking-points.

I’m not here to critique individual versions of adaptations today, Gentle Readers. 

I’m just here to muse on the Big Questions that need solid answers when you’re ready to take on writing your adaptation.

Someone contact them, I demand a recount.

1.       How much of the true lives of the Alcott family will we include?

It’s no secret at this point that Alcott took a lot of inspiration from her real life. But how much do we include? Do we have Thoreau invited over for dinner? Do we address some of the more radical notions of the Alcotts’? Do we just go ahead and make Father in the novel like Bronson in real life?

a.       How to explain/not explain the war and its effect on their lives

For contemporary audiences and readers, the incredibly matter-of-factness of the Civil War taking place deep in the background of the story will not resonate as much as it would to readers back in the day (It plays a bit like the Blitz in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe]. Perhaps it might be a good idea to bring it closer to the fore, beyond merely showing the girls in hoops, and coming across the occasional newspaper story or quietly dropped reference to a battle.

b.       How to address or not address the March’s contemporarily confusing socio-economic position (that of ‘genteel penury’)

Gentle people now in reduced circumstances is a tough sell intellectually when 2019 can allow most everyone to disguise their financial situation through extensive credit and things like those housing bubble mortgages given to lots of Americans. It’s going to be necessary at some point to explain or show how the Marchs, who have so little themselves, have (to our 2019-eyes) pretty clothes, a large, cozy house, the ability to take food and minister to the (much) poor(er) Hummels, and a house servant; Hannah. The humiliating fact that they can’t buy new gloves for a party does not...exactly track in the twenty-first century.

They’re much worse-off than the Bennets of Longbourne, whose financial crisis is on the horizon, but how can you show that to viewers unfamiliar with the notion of life as a fallen-from-wealth family?

2.       The persistent problematic-ness of Amy/Laurie

I will call to mind one adaptation, here, and Kirsten Dunst’s performance in particular. Singlehandedly, at the age of only *10*, she manages to sell the potential of not only Amy, but Amy/Laurie like no one else this tumblerian has ever seen. What a tragedy the film couldn’t have waited for her to grow up enough to also play Amy in the film’s second half.

In a world where perfect casting is rarely obtainable, this child should have been nominated for Oscar. She out-performs every Amy March before or since, ad infinitum.

Like many of the romantic partnerships, which other than Jo/Teddy (which is not presented as romantic in Book One) are included only in Book Two, films front-loaded with Book One (I can’t think of one I’ve seen that wasn’t) find themselves racing to a conclusion, and every one of the three couples suffers in presentation and allowing enough time for viewers to be ‘courted’ by them into liking them.

There’s simply not enough time left to work on all of them. So, it becomes a decision of which one is more important. Traditionally, as Brooke/Meg happens first, they get some character beats, but once Jo turns down Teddy... 

I can hear the screams of horror across the ages.

...adaptations become a fight between showing Amy/Laurie or Jo/Bhaer, yet both of which are true surprises to viewers not familiar with the story, and who need time to warm up and be seduced by these new pairings. 

(Mind you, I do think Bhaer and Jo should sneak up on a viewer/reader, but there still have to be signs planted here and there that make it make sense when it actually does happen.)  

3.       The age and age progression of the girls

Per the book, the story begins with Meg 16, Jo 15, Beth 13, and Amy 12 (aside: poor Marmee).

A clear example of...impractical* casting for teenagers. (And Jo! In trousers!?) * but perhaps necessary for community theatre

As I mentioned a few lines ago, Amy becomes the most difficult to cast, here, as it’s unlikely a person can play both 12 and the age of Amy when she accepts Laurie. Amy may be only 16 or so when she accepts Laurie, but contemporary viewers are probably going to need a little more assurance she’s not a child bride by her looking more mature than 16.

Beth is frequently cast older, which is also troublesome. She’s 16 at most when she dies, and has been ill for some time. (So, easy to assume she wasn’t growing rapidly.)

Jo has to be able to play age 15 to 25+.

Is that meant to be Jo on the left? Does that make Susan Dey Amy? Anyway, this production has the luxury of doing better on the ages of the girls. And they’ve got the inimitable Greer Garson as Aunt March!

Actors chosen can’t only be made-up to pass for certain ages, they also have to convince us they’re playing dress-up in the garret in the early portion of the film. 

In fact, Jo in particular with her harum-scarum ways isn’t deliberately trying to make constant mistakes and faux pas. She’s a kid who hasn’t yet grown up, with a kid’s energy and unbridled sincerity. Convince us of that.

4.       How to show both the importance and the growth of Jo’s writing

Filming someone writing is rarely moving to watch, and what’s more, writing is so misunderstood as a pastime or even a vocation, it doesn’t easily lend itself to being captivating when shown on-screen. And yet Jo’s writing is not only vital to the story, the growth and expression she finds in it are so deeply important to her character, and later to her romance plot with Bhaer. It’s got to be shown, and more than once. Moreso, or at least as much so as her temper, her mouth, and her lioness-like care for her sisters, it IS who she is.

Where’s the silly hat?

5.       Flawed female characters that are meant to confront and wrestle with those flaws

Well, this is a big one, here. It seems to me we’re sort of operating by 2019 where that old saw of [man] girl vs. self isn’t really written about or shown. Our society at large has become very vocal about whoever we are being awesome and “never change”.

Which is just about as far from the notions in Little Women as one could get. Every one of the ‘women’ has something they need to work on, to grow and improve about themselves. From Meg not being able to get over their loss of money and status (remembered from when she was younger), to Amy’s dissatisfaction and constant desire to fine things, to Beth’s introversion, to Jo’s temper and intolerance of those who aren’t as bold and rebellious against society as her, and Jo’s inability to accept the change that will constantly be coming into all their lives as they grow.

Nasty!

The Little Women Alcott wrote had lessons to learn, and directions to grow, contrary to what their gut reactions might be. You can call that a moralistic take on the novel, but you can’t argue that Jo has to change, and is expected to be her own instigator of that change within the novel(s). [It does seem like anymore in films that the only person we expect to change bad habits or wrong ways of being are actual ‘bad guys’/villains. And sometimes not even them.]

6.       Friedrich Bhaer

Well, that’s a mouthful. I don’t doubt that it always has been. The single, fan-dividing phrase of female literature. Am I right?

Doing for umbrella representation until Gene Kelly came along.

You know the story, right? That Alcott was so DONE with readers after Book One assuming and expecting Jo and Teddy to live happily ever after, she was so frustrated (she had never wanted, nor intended for that to happen) with all the shipping she built a Bhaer bomb.

@grrlinthefireplace would climb that.

And it’s still exploding readers’ and viewers’ minds today.

Why Professor Bhaer is the perfect match for Jo, and why their marriage and life together makes ultimate sense is certainly a post for another time, but I will say that if you’re still sore about it, take some time and reread the book as an adult, and see if you don’t also come to see the eminent sense in it.

That said, in any satisfying and successful adaptation, you’ve got to work hard to sell the man your heroine chooses over Laurie. Laurie’s had all of Book One and a good three-quarters of Book Two to endear himself to readers. Who’s this guy?

Well, yes, that’s William Shatner...as Professor Bhaer.

This guy isn’t good enough for Jo. This is nonsense. “Weird old guy with an uncomfortable age gap with my fave.” Are not the sort of things you’re going to want to read in reviews.

First, you’ve got to cast him right. Hollywood’s not *overly* worried about distressing RL gaps in ages between their actresses and actors, you might know, and beards are actually pretty in right now. Bhaer’s not a babe by any means, but he’s got an accent he can work. And he’s in love with our fave.

Think an Alan Rickman-type (I know he’s not German), did you see how hot Kurt Russell made Santa Claus in that Netflix Christmas movie? Jeff Bridges, Pierce Brosnan? Probably all too old. 

Bhaer’s actually described as “middle-aged”, which means 40ish, to Jo’s 25 (when she accepts him). You know who’s 40ish in Hollywood? Gerard Butler, Hugh Jackman, Ewan McGregor, most of Hollywood’s Chrises, RDJ for Pete’s sake is 53. Give him a beard, and awkward social presence tick, and get him working on that accent, and I guarantee your audience will buy Jo’s attraction to him, and create a Twitter for his umbrella.

In the end, Bhaer is key to understanding that the novel isn’t trying to transform Jo into a woman who will fit into Teddy’s wealthy life and the social circles he has no plans to turn his back on. Bhaer is literally the embodiment of Jo making choices that she learns (and I daresay we are meant to learn) are right for her. She finds a man comfortable with who she is, who is in love with her brain as much as with the rest of her, who sees their coupling as a joint project, and who wants her to be the best her. (cough, cough, Gilbert Blythe prototype)

You’ve got to get him right, or what’s come before gets lost in dissatisfaction for Jo’s final, epic choice.

Oh, look, a nice picture of a charismatic, bearded German actor. How did that get here?

Let’s be succinct here in the end, Gentle Reader. Little Women (Books One and Two) and Little Men and Jo’s Boys would make a splendid series. (Such as Anne with an E), there’s certainly enough episodic drama and plot to go around.

Keep that in mind when planning out your adaptation.

What film adaptation is your favorite, and why?

[dansoftwell]

Dan Howell's Natal Chart

note: first of all, obviously, i'm not the owner of the truth, this is a collection of information that i got, analyzed, classified and tried to put the most important things that make sense. And 2nd, English isn't my main language, i'm sorry for the grammatical error that i didn't see, don't hesitate to correct me.

Introduction: Astrological studies describe many of the character traits and they sometimes go deeper into the understanding of a personality. Please, always keep in mind that human beings are continuously evolving and that many parts of our psychological structures are likely to be expressed later, after having undergone significant life's experiences. It is advised to read a portrait with hindsight in order to appreciate its astrological content. Under this condition, you will be able to take full advantage of this type of study. The analysis of an astrological portrait consists in understanding four types of elements which interact with one another: ten planets, twelve zodiacal signs, twelve houses, and what are called aspects between planets (the 11 aspects most commonly used are: conjunction, opposition, square, trine, sextile, quincunx, semi-sextile, sesqui-quadrate, quintile and bi-quintile. The first 5 aspects enumerated are called major aspects).

And remember, the stars don't define personalities, they only tilt it.

Dan's planets and positions

• Personality profile.

The Ascendant is in Cancer and the ruler of the Ascendant is the Moon, in Gemini: His behaviour.

Psychologically speaking, his nature is dreamy, oriented towards nostalgia for things past. He's very instinctive and protects himself against the outside world. His inner life is rich, with fertile and even unlimited imagination, a propensity to avoid unnecessary risks and to pursue security. He shows his true face only to persons who can trust, when there is a kind of well being triggered by the nostalgia for the past. As he was born under this sign, he is emotional, sentimental, restful, imaginative, sensitive, loyal, enduring, protective, vulnerable, generous, romantic, tender, poetic, maternal, dreamy, indolent, greedy and dedicated. He may also be fearful, unrealistic, evasive, passive, touchy, anxious, dependent, stubborn, lunatic, backward-looking, lazy, burdensome, impenetrable and a homebody. Love in the masculine mode: for him, in love, is tender, sensitive and quite loyal. He's influenced by a mother-figure and unconsciously looks for a partner who will offer as much attention and affection as him used to receive as a child. He's a homebody and a dreamer and a blossom in the family cocoon; create, dreaming of adventures and extraordinary trips… that most often take in his head. Tenderness is more important than sexuality, even though it is also an agent for security and for stability. Sheltered from tragedies and life complications because at the very moment when a difficult situation emerges, nips it in the bud either by ignoring it or by withdrawing into his shell quietly, until the storm subsides. His home is happy and rich, quiet and harmonious, throughout his life.

The Sun in Gemini and in House 12: His will and inner motivations.

His mobility is such that he's in every place where isn't expected. Spends lots of time asking questions and… answering them. His curiosity and quick-wittedness are insatiable. His mind is in constant turmoil, hopping from one topic to another, solving problems, accumulating anecdotes and knowledge within a short range of time. His mobility is mostly mental, it takes him afar and turns his daily life into a mosaic of intense and pleasant moments that aren't necessarily related to one another… As he was born under this sign, he's nervous, expressive, lively and adaptable, with a quick mind and a good sense of humour. Is bubbling, playful, sociable, clever, curious, whimsical, independent, intellectual, flexible, ingenious, fanciful, imaginative, charming, cerebral, and he is into everything. He may also be whimsical, unfocused, quirky, superficial, indiscreet, opportunist, unmindful, selfish, sarcastic or mercurial.

Cancer Rising: His personality profile as others may see him. When in control of his emotions, he's the most understanding, sensitive person he could hope to find--but, if NOT in control, is the most miserable. Since he tends to be ruled by emotions, his moody, changeable quality is apparent to everyone around him. His smile is radiant, but tears can easily be close behind. Another characteristic that gives him away is his talkativeness, with an emotional quality coming through loud and clear. He appear gentle and soft, and acts rather reserved with others until he know them well and feel it is safe to be open with them. Has a strong need for emotional security and a sense of belonging, and is deeply attached to the past: his heritage, roots, family, cherished friends, familiar places, etc. Making radical changes or moving away from what is known and safe can be very painful and difficult for him. He tends to hold on to people and memories, as well as possessions of personal or sentimental significance. Having a home, a safe haven, is very important to him.

Others see him as extremely caring, and HE IS caring and nurturing. Is a mother figure in person. If lacks children of his own, he will find surrogate children or pets on which to bestow his maternal instincts. Is strongly attached to family and family traditions. In his professional life, he could naturally gravitate toward the people helping people activities--doctor, nurse, counselor, social worker, etc.

Perhaps his greatest handicap in work is his inability to accept criticism. Others may hesitate to make suggestions to him, but he hates having his judgment challenged or his routine interrupted or intercepted. This comes from his strongly emotional relating of all things around him to the self. He maybe needs to learn to separate his self identity from those things he and others do or say, and learn not to take everything so personally. Others see him as a "softy". He's extremely sentimental and is likely to enjoy romantic reading, movies and "Soap Opera" types of drama. His emotions respond readily to outside stimulation, as well as to his instinctive and intuitive messages. He can be somewhat like a sponge, picking up on the feelings of those around him. Needs to always be alert to this faculty and not allow himself to respond to negative influences. For this reason needs to pick his associates carefully, surrounding himself with positive, self-actuated types. His magnetic personality will draw all types to him, many of whom will be those weaker ones who may rip-off his energy. His pride can become so easily hurt and the hurt so well hidden that those closest to he may not even know it. To others, he can appear especially touchy, bitter and resentful, retreating into his shell to keep everyone away. When this happens, he's likely to begin to overeat and overdrink--to overindulge himself in a manner which makes it more difficult to deal with his emotions, and to the point where he become physically sluggish. Maybe he tries to satisfy his oral need by putting snacks, candy, gum, cigarettes, food, and drinks in his mouth constantly. Also may tries to oversleep and to avoid exercise during these times. The important consideration here is, this is the way for him to grow. These periods are normal in the life process of the person that is /him/.

• Emotions: Feelings and Disposition to Romance

The Sun in Gemini and in House 12: In the love, this Sir, increase the number of his love affairs, probably because don't want to give up his freedom too quickly. He's cerebral to the extent that games of seduction remain… a real game, where feelings and carnal pleasures are merely present. Paradoxically, he's very charming and attractive but is more interested in the game itself. Indeed, thrills of verbal joust, fun, the pleasure to communicate over and over again, remain the centres of his concerns. He clearly prefers to be a bachelor because he appreciates its hustle and bustle: outings, exciting parties or a wide range of encounters etc. However, when he meets with his soul mate, turn into a pleasant and charming partner!

Moon in Gemini and at home 12

He doesn't seem to be intensely emotional or sentimental, and is often unaware of the deepest feelings and needs, both of himself and others. Tears and tantrums perplex him and make him feel very uncomfortable. He prefers to resolve differences by speaking rationally and reasonably, but tends to overlook or mock any attempt to probe the inner depths of himself and others. He will avoids demanding and heavy emotional commitments, and is cautious to establish personal obligations. Needs a lot of mental stimulation and feels close to those who share interests and thoughts. Talking is very important to him. A silent couple is not the kind of company for him.

His own feelings and emotions are like an enigma to him and it is often difficult for him to share with others what he is feeling.

Frequently, he retires from contact with the world and needs a peaceful and renewing environment to flourish and get out of himself.

He identifies with the oppressed, weak or victims in any situation and wants to help or care for them in some way.

Moon in harmonic aspect to Venus orb 3 ° 20 ' Feel that small acts of caring and consideration are essential to the happiness and success of a relationship and knows how to make others feel accepted, loved and cherished.

Moon in harmonic aspect to Saturn orb 4 ° 32 ' Has an internal posture and balance that allows it to act efficiently during traumas and emotional stress. He maintains perspective and objectivity around highly emotionally charged issues, many times, to the chagrin of others who would like him to react more intensely. He is a quiet and loyal support to his friends and loved ones.

Venus in Leo at home 2

Warm and generous in love, he doesn't tolerate pettiness or stinginess in his partner. Wants a heroic figure, a Prince or Princess to be idealized and adored, someone to admire with all your heart, someone to be proud of. He's of great loyalty and devotion once gives his heart to someone. He longs for love, appreciation and attention from others and hates being ignored. Is somewhat susceptible to flattery and loves to feel SPECIAL. Enjoys some drama and color in his love life and great gestures of love or an extravagant expression of generosity that impresses him.

For him, love and affection must be expressed tangibly; He loves to give and receive gifts. Value the luxuries, comfort and elegance very highly and appreciate the beautiful things. It can also be immoderate and extravagant. He should be careful not to be overly possessive of the people he loves and his belongings.

Majority someone with venus in leo loves to court and be courted, and they need to feel very special. They're warm, generous, and even grand. Though really quite loyal to their partners, they thriveon romantic attention.

Venus Conjunct Mars orb 4 ° 7 ' He's very, very loving, and it seems very difficult to be without a loving relationship for some time. When someone attracts him, he reacts actively and ardently, and sometimes with too much force. Working artistically or creatively could satisfy their enormous desire for love and beauty.

Venus conjunction Jupiter orb 5 ° 33 ' He's of great heart and generosity with both his money and his affections, and he is not happy if he has to be limited or restrained in any way. The stinginess or pettiness is alien to its nature, and it feels more comfortable in an elegant and beautiful environment. Asceticism isn't his thing. He enjoys sponsoring cultural activities. Has an optimistic and friendly attitude towards others and promotes in others the expression of the finest and friendliest side. He falls in love with successful people, noble and idealistic.

Venus in disharmonious aspect to Saturn orb 1 ° 12 ' He's serious and finds it difficult to enjoy carefree, open and playful with others. Rarely does anything for the pleasure of doing it, and can be very stingy and parsimonious. Perhaps due to past experiences in his life, he is very cautious when intimate with people and in sharing his feelings. Although he wants love and affection, intimacy is difficult for him.

if you want more information of dan's chart I recommend this

Dan's Houses

Phil Lester’s natal chart

[reveriesforyou]

The Photograph

Hi babes! This is a fluffy oneshot about Peter having a crush on one of Michelle's friends at Midtown High. One day, he spots her reading outside and secretly takes a photo of her because he thinks that she looks too perfect to go unseen, and he pins the photo up in the back of his locker. Everything is fine until Flash Thompson gets his hands on Peter's photo and brings it to her attention. After that, awkward cuteness ensues and I hope that you all like it!

The Photograph

Hot licks of pain seared throughout Peter’s body. His lip was split, there was a purpling bruise on his temple that was accompanied by a headache so powerful that it’s aching refused to be ignored. Even walking from class to class was taking a toll on Peter. He was exhausted and in pain, but Peter remained hellbent on keeping Queens safe, no matter the cost.  

    Peter’s eyes glazed over and his body was ready to shut down. Doing his best to keep himself up on his feet, he focused on the photo that he had tacked up of her in the back of his locker.

    In the photo, the girl was outside, hidden beneath the shade of a rather large tree. She was stretched out on a light pink blanket, a copy of Charles Baudelaire’s, ‘The Flowers of Evil,’ open in front of her. There was a carton of fresh strawberries and a rather oversized iced coffee balanced haphazardly against her backpack on the ground with her, and every so often, Peter recalled how delightedly blissful she looked each time she bit into a ripe berry. The sun’s rays, the soft breeze wandering through the tree’s leaves, and the chatter bumbling down to her from their shared high school didn’t even faze the girl. Her mind remained with the poet’s.

    After a few minutes of watching her, Peter felt soothed. Everything about her made him feel better. He loved the way she licked her lips after she ate, he loved the way that she read her favorite verses aloud, he loved the way that she laughed at herself when she nearly spilled her coffee, and he loved the way that she helped him forget about the constant stress that was now heavily present in his life.

    When Peter finally snapped the photo, she was laying on her side, one hand wound into her silky hair to keep it out of her eyes, and the other hand holding her poetry book open. Her eyes were focused on comprehending the poems on each page, but she wore a soft smile on her lips that made it clear that she wasn’t scrutinizing anything too intensely. The girl was merely enjoying her free period in the sun and Peter longed to do the same.

    Since then, Peter looked for her in almost every hallway, in every classroom window, and everyday at lunch. They’d spoken a handful of times, seeing as they were in the same history class, but other than class discussions, Peter hadn’t mustered up the nerve to say hello outside of an intellectual, in-class debate.

    One day, she was late to history and when she’d walked into the room, she found that her normal seat next to the window had been taken, so she headed towards the first empty desk she saw. Peter, already occupying one of the seats, nearly suffered a heart attack when she placed her binder next to his and offered him a quiet “good morning.”

    It had taken Peter a few seconds to force his brain to form a response to her and then to get his mouth to open and say the words that his brain was attempting to communicate back to her. When he stuttered out, “hey, yeah, good morning,” she didn’t tease him for his weirdness, instead she smiled at him and Peter could’ve melted onto the floor right then and there.

    During that day’s lecture, their teacher was detailing women’s struggles throughout the years to gain the 19th amendment, which won women of all colors, and social standings the right to vote. She scribbled down notes and nodded in agreement with the teacher as she spoke of Ida B. Well’s, Lucy Burns’ and Alice Paul’s courageous actions in the suffrage movement. It was only after Flash Thompson opened his mouth that Peter observed a frown cross over her features.

    “Why didn’t they just keep doing what Florence Kelley advised? If they had followed her directions, they wouldn’t have gotten radical and thrown into prison. Florence Kelley was meeting with President Woodrow Wilson, and he explained to her why he couldn’t grant women suffrage right then, but he said he would going forward. The National Women’s Party didn’t know what they were doing, and furthermore, they set the women’s rights movement back with their crazy antics.” Flash finished, folding his hands behind his head and leaning back in his chair.

    Glancing over at the girl in the chair next to him, Peter knew that not only was Flash painfully incorrect and uneducated, but she was clearly getting ready to put Flash back into his place.

    “Wow, that’s actually so, so, so wrong.” She started, turning slightly in her chair to face Flash, “if Florence Kelley had kept asking President Wilson to recognize women as intelligent, reasonable beings capable of making a decisive decision, it’s unlikely that the 19th amendment would’ve been passed in 1920. The only reason women were granted suffrage is because of The National Woman's Party. These women marched, were beaten in the streets, picketed in front of the White House, and were thrown into jail for the good of women everywhere. President Wilson only granted women the right to suffrage after women were dying in prison due to the hunger strike Alice Paul began. Not to mention, while these women were imprisoned, they were denied basic human rights and the entire reason they were in locked away in jail was because they were blocking traffic on the sidewalk. It took drastic measures to humanize women in men’s eyes and without the heroic antics of these women, who knows where women would stand today. I mean, a woman’s right to her own body is something that could be taken away at any moment, and women are constantly battling the image that men have imposed upon us. Therefore, your opinion is invalid because you apparently cannot grasp the severity of the situation, past and present.”

    Peter, as well as the rest of the class, was stunned into silence. Normally, she didn’t partake in class discussions because she was shy, but now that she had, everyone in the room was shocked by the intellect that she had just destroyed Flash with. Peter wanted nothing more than to hear her speak all day, and maybe to introduce her to Aunt May.

    Peter could barely focus as Michelle began to back her up. Leaning closer to the wonderfully insightful girl next to him, Peter let her know just how clever he found her. “That was amazing, everything you said was perfect and spot-on. That was the greatest thing that I’ve ever seen and I can’t wait for you do it again.” Peter congratulated the girl.

    “You don’t think it was too much?” She asked worriedly, biting her lip and fiddling with the pencil in her hands.

    Peter shook his head, his eyes wide, “No, no! Absolutely not! You would’ve made Alice Paul very proud.”

    Placing a hand atop of his, she thanked him with a smile. “You’re the best, Peter,” she said before turning her focus back to their teacher.

    After that, she had joined Peter on Flash’s hit-list, so Peter should’ve known better than to try and relax with his locker wide open. Peter was knocked out of his daydream of going home to her and simply curling up around her to sleep by Flash’s grabby hand, first shoving him out of the way, and then stealing his photo of her.

    As Flash rushed down the hall, Peter struggled after him, both boys trying to beat each other to where she stood deep in conversation with Michelle about the numerous male authors whose most famous novels were stolen works from their wives.

    “Flash, don’t” Peter shouted, as he tried to ignore the shooting pain traveling up his body.

    “Too late, Penis Parker,” Flash called as he weaved gracefully inbetween students to get to their target.

    “Oh my gosh,” Michelle muttered, rolling her eyes as she nodded her head towards the two boys heading their way. “Losers.”

    “His lip is bleeding,” She said, concern lacing into her tone. “Do you think he’s okay?”

    “Your boyfriend is fine, probably tripped over a lego or something on his way to the bathroom and banged his head into the wall on his way down.” Michelle tried to reason with her friend. She’d detected that her friend and Peter had the biggest of crushes on one another way before either one of them had, and she had made it her mission to mock them every chance she got.

    Flash was the first to reach the two girls, holding up the photo of her that Peter had taken of her reading outside. “Parker, Penis.” He wheezed, “Penis Parker took this picture of you and had it taped up behind his textbooks in his locker.” Bending over to soothe the splint in his side, Flash handed the photo to the confused girl in front of him.

    As Peter came to a stop in front of her and Michelle, he groaned and threw his hands up into the air, uttering a barely audible, “fuck.”

    When the girls saw Peter up close, they found that Peter was barely recognizable due to all of the bruises masking his pale skin. Quickly handing the photo to Michelle, the girl surged forward, lightly grabbing onto Peter’s sweater to steady him. “Peter, what happened to you? You’re hurt,” she questioned, growing a little more distraught as she studied him face to face.

    “The picture, I’m sorry, I know it’s so creepy. I didn’t mean to be a weirdo and I’m sorry if it made you uncomfortable, I swear that I’m not stalking you.” Peter mumbled, trying unsuccessfully to keep his lip from bleeding.

    “Peter, I don’t care about the photo. What happened to you? Oh no, your lip is bleeding,” She rambled, steering Peter towards the bench nearest to them. “Sit,” she instructed, digging through her backpack for a tissue to dab Peter’s cut with.

    “You’re seriously not going to say anything about the picture he clearly took of you?” Flash whined, refusing to accept defeat.

    Michelle raised her eyebrows, “No, I think it’s disturbing too. You’re not alone in that, Flash.”

    “Do you need ice?” She asked Peter, guiding Peter to look up so she could inspect his face for any further damage. “You need ice, Michelle, could you please go get him ice? Flash, could you please go away?” She asked, looking at the pair over her shoulder.

    Flash was nearly beside himself, “it’s weird! You have to acknowledge that it’s weird that he not only took a photo of you without your knowledge, but that he has it pinned up like you are his girlfriend or something? Really not going to say anything about that?”

    “For all you know,” she said, turning to face Flash as she did that day in class, “Peter could very well be my boyfriend!”

    Peter’s jaw dropped so far that she had to readjust his head to keep the tissue on his open wound. Gently prying her helping hand from his lip, “wait, really?” Peter asked. “You’d be my girlfriend after all this?”

    “This is disgusting,” Michelle interjected. Handing Peter’s photo back to him, she grabbed Flash by the collar of his polo shirt and dragged him down the hallway. “We’ll be back with ice and some band-aids.”

    She and Peter could hear Flash’s discontented grumbles as he followed Michelle down to the nurse’s office to retrieve some medical aid for Peter.

    “Are you really not freaked out?” Peter asked, staring up at her with big, brown, puppy-dog eyes.

    Sighing, she moved to stand in between Peter’s legs to inspect how much further his lip had split. “If you keep talking, the cut is never going to heal. This,” she gestured to Peter’s clearly damaged frame, “freaks me out more than anything. What’s happening to you? If I can help you, please let me. I care about you and I hate that you’re hurt.” She pouted.

    She was so close that Peter could smell all the floral notes in her perfume, and if he wanted to, he could hug himself close to her and never let go. “I can’t tell you what’s happening, but if I stop, things will get worse. Not just for me, but for everyone. I’m trying to help.”

    Running a hand through his hair, she shook her head. “Then let me help you. If you’re helping everyone, you deserve to have someone help you, and I want you to let me be that person, Peter.”

    Pinching the palm of his hand, Peter spotted Flash and Michelle returning with ice, ointment and bandages in hand, and he knew that he had to be quick. “It would really help me if you went out to dinner with me. Just being with you would help me. That’s why I took the picture of you. Every day that I felt like I was drowning, I would look at you, well the picture of you, and it would help me to breath again.”

    “Pick me up on Saturday. I’ll be ready at 7:30,” she agreed, much to not only Peter’s, but Flash’s surprise.

    “Come on!” Flash hissed, “how is it that Parker gets a date with a hot girl after he hides in the bushes and takes secret pictures of her? What the hell is going on right now? Do I live in the twilight zone?”

    “For fucks sake, Flash.” Michelle muttered, turning to him with squared shoulders, “she clearly knew that he was taking the photos of her. Who would smile while reading ‘The Flowers of Evil?’ And beyond that, she’s liked him for months and he’s liked her for months. All you’ve really done is finally bring them closer together. Congratulations Flash, your plan has officially backfired.”

    Flash groaned throughout the rest of the day and Michelle planned on teasing him for the rest of the school year. The girl’s cheeks were flushed pink until she went to sleep, and Peter couldn’t stop smiling, even though it only made the split in his lip worse.

[plantsense]

part 3/3

What Can Plants Teach Us About Threats?

Do threats always need to be contained, where you either eradicate them or succumb to them? Can taking a hit actually boost personal integrity?

A threat is “a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger” (Lexico.com). Humans, plants, animals, and even the planet face threats every day. From hawks and caterpillars to poverty and oppression; from contaminated water and rising temperatures to disease and resource scarcity, threats are ubiquitous. Our clovers faced the threat of a dandelion invasion. Humans right now are facing the threat of Covid-19.

Plants and animals have similar problem solving algorithms to evaluate and address these threats, but we utilize our energy in different ways. In response to a threat, we each start with the go-to tools from our repertoires. Sometimes we’re well-prepared and that’s that and we carry on. Other times the threat is a bigger one, or a novel one, or working in combination with another one. Our tools aren’t enough and we don’t know what to do next. Should we throw our hands up in despair? Let’s dig a little deeper.

People-Like Plants

Our comic follows a community of clovers trying hard to survive a dandelion invasion. They protect themselves using classic human/animal strategies in an attempt to control the situation they find themselves in. They attack, avoid, numb, and panic in response to their new neighbors -- anything to avoid having to admit defeat and share space. They show classic human fight, flight, freeze and fawn responses, and they aren’t successful at eradicating the threat.

People, particularly when entrenched in systemic privilege, work to maintain status quo by controlling our surroundings and situations. We’re so good at it, in fact, that we’ve forgotten what to do when threat eradication doesn’t work or isn’t enough. We resign ourselves to a path of blinders, numbing, and denial in a primal attempt at self-preservation. To escape that pain, we double our efforts. Threat, begone!

“But escape is not a solution; at most, it is a way of sidestepping a problem. Animals therefore do not solve problems, they simply avoid them more efficiently” - Stefano Mancuso, The Revolutionary Genius of Plants

Plant-like plants do it differently. Plants know all about radical acceptance, and differentiate between acceptance and defeat. They face a myriad of threats including crowding, caterpillars, drought, shade, disease, and the farmer’s plow. Being literally rooted to the ground, however, means they can’t flee, and lacking bones and muscles, they’re also severely limited in their ability to attack and fight.

What tools do plants have to maintain their integrity? Some level of sacrifice is assumed in the wisdom of plant resilience, and time moves much more slowly in their world. By necessity, plants are closely tuned into their environment, learning from experience, and changing themselves -- instead of their environment -- in order to adapt to it. In this way, they develop different sorts of defense mechanisms. For example, in response to being munched, some plants can sound the alarm via their root networks, alerting neighbors that predators are near. The whole community will then boost bitter tasting compounds in their leaves to become less appealing. Alternatively, a plant might call for help, releasing a chemical to attract natural predators of the insects feasting on them. On a longer timescale, when a plant wilts from lack of water, or suffers from lack of sun, it can respond by growing a more extensive root system, or larger, darker leaves to better capture limited sunlight. They even use epigenetics to encode more drought or shade resilience into the next generation.

Conversely, if a plant has never been nibbled by a caterpillar, then it doesn’t learn how to defend itself. It stays evolutionarily immature, weak, and stagnant. The plant uses the experience of being nibbled to gather intelligence and act. While people panic when they can’t escape a threat, plants bravely stand tall in their radical acceptance of the environment.

Plant-Like People and Communities

"I can be changed by what happens to me. But I refuse to be reduced by it." ― Maya Angelou

Like plants, we can work together to understand the nuances of a problem, educate ourselves, and own our decisions. Instead of resigning, denying and stagnating, we can heed each other’s warnings and learn from everyone’s successes and mistakes. We can iterate and evolve so we’re better prepared next time.

Looking at the example of Covid-19, we have a humbling virus that keeps us in check -- our behavior, our drive, our oppression, even our stress responses that seem to be working in a constant low grade overdrive. Our initial response of shelter-in-place surfaced a host of other problems that can no longer be ignored. We’re witnessing firsthand just how fragile the structure of our US economy is, being built on a foundation of systemic oppression and exploitation. We have a new understanding of the nuances of social interaction needs and what’s necessary, what’s fluff, what just gets in the way, and what could be so much better, if done differently. Many educators and parents are reexamining the pedagogy of the education system, and weakness in foodways are becoming clear. The threats are coming from so many directions, we can’t just escape them piecemeal anymore.

Plant-like communities of people utilize collective brainpower across the world to problem solve a shared threat. For example, the field of virology made significant advances in response to the Spanish Flu of 1918 and we’re coming together now to understand the current virus at record speeds. Each country and region has responded to the virus in different ways. We’ve ragged on Sweden and Florida or adored South Korea and New Zealand. But we can compare notes to see what’s working and what’s not and use that as intelligence to inform our next steps. Because of current shelter-in-place orders, we now have more data to address climate change. Indirectly, this pandemic has called global attention and energy to finally address systemic oppression. George Floyd’s murder was the last straw and now we’ve got the resources and fire to look deeper than the usual narratives.

Plant-like people might realize how busy their lives were and how slowing down and resting (gasp!) can have benefits. We might put more energy into our self-care routines, focusing on the areas that the virus tends to attack. We re-evaluate our priorities and use our fight or flight energy to not escape a threat, but to tune into what we genuinely need.

When our human tools to maintain status quo run out, plants remind us that it doesn’t have to be game over; it’s not the end of the story. The story has just begun.

Further Resources

The Revolutionary Genius of Plants by Stefano Mancuso

Plants Use Underground Communication to Learn When Plants are Stressed

Plants Communicate to Warn Against Danger

Video on the Amazing Ways that Plants Defend Themselves

Stress-induced Memory Alters Growth of Clonal Offspring of White Clover

Forget Homeschooling During the Pandemic. Teach Life Skills Instead

What Needs to Change in America’s Food System

Discovery and characterization of the 1918 pandemic influenza virus in historical context

Richard E. Shope, 1957 Albert Lasker Award

Climate Change and Coronavirus

[t-p-smythe-blog]

Do Women Abuse? My Story by Rayanne Irving

Do Women Abuse? My Story by Rayanne K. Irving  I will never forget the earth shattering, panic inducing moment when my own body appeared to have betrayed me – yet again. Roughly six months after escaping from the sex slave trade I was sitting on my mother’s couch in the middle of the night, awake and alone, watching the movie,  “Bastard Out of Carolina” .  During one scene – the stepfather pulled the main character, a little girl named “Bone”, onto his lap in the car consequently raping her. Now, most people’s reaction to this harrowing storyline would be of outrage, disgust, disbelief.  My body’s reaction however was entirely of a different nature.  Privately, my body became aroused – stimulated by the sight it was processing. Such a purely primal response, initiated by the unthinkable, was an unimaginable assault on my very sanity.  And my 17-year-old logic terrified me.  Was I a sexual predator because I had become physically turned on by the rape of a little girl?  Truth for me, was that I had never taken part in sober, consensual intimacy. All I had known was coercion, rape, and prostitution up until that point in my life. The very act of my body responding to such a degree of violence despite how I mentally felt about rape and sex, shook my already collapsing core of character and integrity.  That dirty little secret was to be the first of many “triggers” that would eventually, over time, rise to the surface for me. Marred by these “quirks ” I possessed yet tried so hard to hide, sparked the recognition that I was indeed more dysfunctional than I consciously knew. This begs the question: why did my body respond to the very things I consciously believed I loathed?  Probing deeper to investigate the nature of my new paradoxical personality radically helped to change not only my own recognition of self, but also to find acceptance in my ever-shifting mental clarity. My journey opened me up to the expression of compassion for the oftentimes devastating, as well as maddening experience, it means to be ‘human’.  Personally, I feel there is much left to interpret pertaining to the female sexual predator, largely due to a case of the ‘predator’ existing in a complex field of varied degrees. Often going unnoticed, underreported, or worst of all, flat out denied. The simplified dictionary definition would have the word ‘predator’ described as a person who looks for other people in order to use, control, or harm in some way. Then there is the  sexual predator definition:  “A sexual predator is a person seen as obtaining or trying to obtain sexual contact with another person in a metaphorically “predatory” or abusive manner. Analogous to how a predator hunts down its prey, so the sexual predator is thought to “hunt” for his or her sex “partners.”  The majority of public opinion regarding the ‘typecast’ sexual predator has long been saturated in judgment, reducing these individuals down to vile and sick human beings in possession of no moral consequence. Yet objectively lurking behind that stance, has also been some not so subtle double standards. Such as, to be raped is often rationalized as the responsibility of the victim (ie what did she wear, how was she behaving, who was she hanging out with). Another and mayhap far more damaging standard was that rape was generally, as well as during archival times lawfully, considered a crime only committed against women by men. The delusion that women could not be predators and men could not be raped was spoon-fed to the masses by way of gender stigmatization.  Encompassing the subject of rape was the common visual association being only that of ‘penetration’. Due to gender stamping, grossly overlooked was the hard hitting actuality that overpowering to steal gratification was not the pinnacle in all abuse cases. Rather just in the reported ones. Emotional manipulation, deception, intimidation, fear, guilt, physical impairment, mental incapacity, manual stimulation and more kept the ever rising number of shame and guilt ridden victims quiet, especially boys who were raised to be men; thought incapable of being raped. To be male was to be the aggressor, the conqueror, virile, and therefore treated as invulnerable.  The human body (male and female), when placed under extreme stress, fear, or stimulus, has been known to respond physically by attaining erection and even orgasm, regardless of any true arousal. The physical responses can lead to confusing emotions that, left to grow under the tier of shame, can even call into question one’s sexual orientation. All of this allows for the female predator to slip into myth. If you look at rape throughout history, it has absolutely nothing to do with gender, the way a person dressed, the way they spoke, or even where they happened to be at the time. Rape was and is used as a way to extract submission. A way to exercise one’s dominance and power. Not just over another human being but more often than not – over the perpetrators’ very own life.  One of Psychology’s longest standing debates is that of Nature vs. Nurture. The argument takes place around whether a human’s development is predisposed in his DNA, or if the majority of it is influenced by environment and life experiences.  But what if we took out the word versus, asserting instead that Nurture creates Nature and Nature configures Nurture. Existing in harmony, they are always transforming one another.  I think that we can all agree the brain is the most complex, and often times mysterious organ in the human body. While the brain controls everything we do, not all action is conscious or voluntary. When the dynamic interplay between mind and body becomes compromised, in extreme cases it can destroy one’s whole outlook and experience of the world.  Scientifically it has been proven that trauma, at any age, is capable of compromising communication between the limbic system (the emotional brain and home of the amygdala) and the cortex system (responsible for memory, perception, attention, awareness, thought and consciousness). When a synaptic transmission is shut down due to trauma the amygdala fires up, becoming overly reactive, as you are no longer able to find reason, organize or problem solve in the manner that involves conscious perception. The amygdala engages the survival mechanism of fight or flight; creating emotional memory through perception alone. Emotional memory is subconscious, therefore incapable of introspect i.e. ‘act now think later.’ Sometimes, or during repetitive (also referred to as complex) trauma, the brain can become ‘stuck’ in the flight or fight mode. Adaption to the intricate interpretation of information regarding its surroundings includes normalizing the outlook concerning it’s circumstantial habitat while also relying solely on the emotional memory (triggers) to act as an early warning system and ensure survival.  We’ve all heard of muscle memory; we know that muscles are capable of storing ranges of physical motion. Were you aware that muscles can also store emotions, even misinterpreted ones? Emotional memory or perceptions of an experience are carried by the neurones in our brain and stored on a cellular level in our body. These emotions can create blockages of energy atop our main organs, causing stress and imbalances. If a stressor becomes ongoing, the body will attempt to ‘adapt’. Adaptation can include the borrowing of other energy resources and the releasing of hormones until all other energy is depleted. When the compensations become unsustainable, unidentifiable illnesses and more psychosomatic conditions can arise.  In summary, consistent abuse and enormous amounts of stress lead only in one direction: exceeding normal homeostatic limits, thus initiating corresponding compensations. Change in your brain and body chemistry can lead to specific, subconscious behaviour drawn from implicit memory in order to adapt to the constant stressors. Beginning an actual physical reorganization of its own wiring, entering you into a state called allostasis – the point were you find a new way of ‘being’, ‘escaping’ or in extreme cases, ‘surviving’.  You cannot have Ying without Yang, Light without Dark or Nature without Nurture, so why would the term ‘predator’ be so much more commonly appointed to man and not shared equally by the female?  To answer the question of my seventeen year old self, did my physical response to rape make me a sexual predator? No. I recognize now that rape, the act or sight of it, at that time, set off physical and mental triggers accumulated from living in a constant state of flight or fight during my time ‘in the life’.  However, having been personally recruited into the sex slave trade by a 15-year-old girl, and lastly pimped by a 30 something year old Madam taught me this short, if unscientific lesson.  Prey can learn to become Predator in an extreme act of self preservation.  If a woman, or anybody really, who comes from generational abuse, who was raised with abuse or exposed to it at any one time seeks to end the cycle of being or feeling victimized, they could or would turn into a predator and use dominance to claim back what could be seen as a portion of control over their life, even by way of becoming an accomplice, an instigator or dominant by sexually exploiting others.   Do you want to share our story of female abuse?  Email us    securely.

http://www.drjohnaking.com/the-voice/do-women-abuse-a-female-survivors-story/

[mirandaawesome3-blog]

Do Women Abuse? My Story by Rayanne Irving

Do Women Abuse? My Story by Rayanne K. Irving  I will never forget the earth shattering, panic inducing moment when my own body appeared to have betrayed me – yet again. Roughly six months after escaping from the sex slave trade I was sitting on my mother’s couch in the middle of the night, awake and alone, watching the movie,  “Bastard Out of Carolina” .  During one scene – the stepfather pulled the main character, a little girl named “Bone”, onto his lap in the car consequently raping her. Now, most people’s reaction to this harrowing storyline would be of outrage, disgust, disbelief.  My body’s reaction however was entirely of a different nature.  Privately, my body became aroused – stimulated by the sight it was processing. Such a purely primal response, initiated by the unthinkable, was an unimaginable assault on my very sanity.  And my 17-year-old logic terrified me.  Was I a sexual predator because I had become physically turned on by the rape of a little girl?  Truth for me, was that I had never taken part in sober, consensual intimacy. All I had known was coercion, rape, and prostitution up until that point in my life. The very act of my body responding to such a degree of violence despite how I mentally felt about rape and sex, shook my already collapsing core of character and integrity.  That dirty little secret was to be the first of many “triggers” that would eventually, over time, rise to the surface for me. Marred by these “quirks ” I possessed yet tried so hard to hide, sparked the recognition that I was indeed more dysfunctional than I consciously knew. This begs the question: why did my body respond to the very things I consciously believed I loathed?  Probing deeper to investigate the nature of my new paradoxical personality radically helped to change not only my own recognition of self, but also to find acceptance in my ever-shifting mental clarity. My journey opened me up to the expression of compassion for the oftentimes devastating, as well as maddening experience, it means to be ‘human’.  Personally, I feel there is much left to interpret pertaining to the female sexual predator, largely due to a case of the ‘predator’ existing in a complex field of varied degrees. Often going unnoticed, underreported, or worst of all, flat out denied. The simplified dictionary definition would have the word ‘predator’ described as a person who looks for other people in order to use, control, or harm in some way. Then there is the  sexual predator definition:  “A sexual predator is a person seen as obtaining or trying to obtain sexual contact with another person in a metaphorically “predatory” or abusive manner. Analogous to how a predator hunts down its prey, so the sexual predator is thought to “hunt” for his or her sex “partners.”  The majority of public opinion regarding the ‘typecast’ sexual predator has long been saturated in judgment, reducing these individuals down to vile and sick human beings in possession of no moral consequence. Yet objectively lurking behind that stance, has also been some not so subtle double standards. Such as, to be raped is often rationalized as the responsibility of the victim (ie what did she wear, how was she behaving, who was she hanging out with). Another and mayhap far more damaging standard was that rape was generally, as well as during archival times lawfully, considered a crime only committed against women by men. The delusion that women could not be predators and men could not be raped was spoon-fed to the masses by way of gender stigmatization.  Encompassing the subject of rape was the common visual association being only that of ‘penetration’. Due to gender stamping, grossly overlooked was the hard hitting actuality that overpowering to steal gratification was not the pinnacle in all abuse cases. Rather just in the reported ones. Emotional manipulation, deception, intimidation, fear, guilt, physical impairment, mental incapacity, manual stimulation and more kept the ever rising number of shame and guilt ridden victims quiet, especially boys who were raised to be men; thought incapable of being raped. To be male was to be the aggressor, the conqueror, virile, and therefore treated as invulnerable.  The human body (male and female), when placed under extreme stress, fear, or stimulus, has been known to respond physically by attaining erection and even orgasm, regardless of any true arousal. The physical responses can lead to confusing emotions that, left to grow under the tier of shame, can even call into question one’s sexual orientation. All of this allows for the female predator to slip into myth. If you look at rape throughout history, it has absolutely nothing to do with gender, the way a person dressed, the way they spoke, or even where they happened to be at the time. Rape was and is used as a way to extract submission. A way to exercise one’s dominance and power. Not just over another human being but more often than not – over the perpetrators’ very own life.  One of Psychology’s longest standing debates is that of Nature vs. Nurture. The argument takes place around whether a human’s development is predisposed in his DNA, or if the majority of it is influenced by environment and life experiences.  But what if we took out the word versus, asserting instead that Nurture creates Nature and Nature configures Nurture. Existing in harmony, they are always transforming one another.  I think that we can all agree the brain is the most complex, and often times mysterious organ in the human body. While the brain controls everything we do, not all action is conscious or voluntary. When the dynamic interplay between mind and body becomes compromised, in extreme cases it can destroy one’s whole outlook and experience of the world.  Scientifically it has been proven that trauma, at any age, is capable of compromising communication between the limbic system (the emotional brain and home of the amygdala) and the cortex system (responsible for memory, perception, attention, awareness, thought and consciousness). When a synaptic transmission is shut down due to trauma the amygdala fires up, becoming overly reactive, as you are no longer able to find reason, organize or problem solve in the manner that involves conscious perception. The amygdala engages the survival mechanism of fight or flight; creating emotional memory through perception alone. Emotional memory is subconscious, therefore incapable of introspect i.e. ‘act now think later.’ Sometimes, or during repetitive (also referred to as complex) trauma, the brain can become ‘stuck’ in the flight or fight mode. Adaption to the intricate interpretation of information regarding its surroundings includes normalizing the outlook concerning it’s circumstantial habitat while also relying solely on the emotional memory (triggers) to act as an early warning system and ensure survival.  We’ve all heard of muscle memory; we know that muscles are capable of storing ranges of physical motion. Were you aware that muscles can also store emotions, even misinterpreted ones? Emotional memory or perceptions of an experience are carried by the neurones in our brain and stored on a cellular level in our body. These emotions can create blockages of energy atop our main organs, causing stress and imbalances. If a stressor becomes ongoing, the body will attempt to ‘adapt’. Adaptation can include the borrowing of other energy resources and the releasing of hormones until all other energy is depleted. When the compensations become unsustainable, unidentifiable illnesses and more psychosomatic conditions can arise.  In summary, consistent abuse and enormous amounts of stress lead only in one direction: exceeding normal homeostatic limits, thus initiating corresponding compensations. Change in your brain and body chemistry can lead to specific, subconscious behaviour drawn from implicit memory in order to adapt to the constant stressors. Beginning an actual physical reorganization of its own wiring, entering you into a state called allostasis – the point were you find a new way of ‘being’, ‘escaping’ or in extreme cases, ‘surviving’.  You cannot have Ying without Yang, Light without Dark or Nature without Nurture, so why would the term ‘predator’ be so much more commonly appointed to man and not shared equally by the female?  To answer the question of my seventeen year old self, did my physical response to rape make me a sexual predator? No. I recognize now that rape, the act or sight of it, at that time, set off physical and mental triggers accumulated from living in a constant state of flight or fight during my time ‘in the life’.  However, having been personally recruited into the sex slave trade by a 15-year-old girl, and lastly pimped by a 30 something year old Madam taught me this short, if unscientific lesson.  Prey can learn to become Predator in an extreme act of self preservation.  If a woman, or anybody really, who comes from generational abuse, who was raised with abuse or exposed to it at any one time seeks to end the cycle of being or feeling victimized, they could or would turn into a predator and use dominance to claim back what could be seen as a portion of control over their life, even by way of becoming an accomplice, an instigator or dominant by sexually exploiting others.   Do you want to share our story of female abuse?  Email us    securely.

http://www.drjohnaking.com/the-voice/do-women-abuse-a-female-survivors-story/

[deanandsam-sexchester]

foolish-nymeria replied to your post “oh i’ve got to say something that will make me a horrible person,...”

As much as I love Robin for her work, I will be forever against her fanfiction rant. I read two beautiful Fitz/Fool fanfics which were soooo beautiful and well written. I wish there were more.

I know. I didn’t want to get into it too much because if I start deconstructing her arguments I will write an essay (i did in my head in the shower the morning that i read this but after that it slipped from my mind) and I don’t want to bore the lot of ya with that, but I do strongly disagree with her position, although I understand the feeling of possesive love over her characters that I believe fed her rant. I personally don’t even have anything against the “personal masturbation fantasies” she spoke so fervently about, because I’ve read much for and against Mary Sues and I firmly believe people have a right to write whatever they want, and those who don’t like it don’t have to read it (it would be a long discussion about the limits of freedom of speech which I don’t intend to get into now). Yet again, for a writer to happen to find a badly written fic where their beloved character, that for many are almost like their children (in fact isn’t there a movie about it with the word “children” in the title?), or family, are put in awful situations and do awful things, it must feel like seeing someone drew porn of your child. Then again, people are not putting it in your face, they are sharing it in their little corner of the Internet, their blog, their deviantart account, and they don’t mean to offend you personally. Besides, I think once you create something and give it to the world, it is not completely and totally yours anymore. But god I am straying exactly into the opinion essay I said I wouldn’t write.

However, when I read her rant and how vocal and assertive Robin is about fanfiction I felt terribly guilty that I had already done it, I’d already written some really terribly written shitty oneshot because I couldn’t find anybody else more skilled than I that would write the kind of crossover I wanted (Jon Snow meets Fitz and they bond over being bastards with wolves). When I read Robin’s rant I felt like a child being scolded by their parents. I felt that I had violated her will and stole her characters from her. And to do something like that to someone I really do admire so much felt terrible. That is why I understand that there are so little fanfics over the web, and probably the people who wrote those are recent fans who are not aware of Robin’s opinion. In fact, the only fanfic in ff.net was never continued after someone accused the writer of violating the terms of ff.net because Robin did not permit fanfic of her work. 

But I ask myself, what are we to do in the mean time? What are we to do while we wait for the release of Assassin’s Fate? Can we not attempt to write how we would like the story to end? What is the limit between discussing possible endings and imagining them and writing them? Is really such a bad thing if we use our blogs and social media to share between ourselves, in our little circles, a picture of how we imagine/want the story to end? 

Another thing to consider (and i’ll shut up now) is that her rant was published ten years ago, and things have changed since. Fanfiction has grown as a way to connect people and spur creativity as much as fanart, and the communication between fans and creators has been radically improved. I’m thinking of Supernatural as an example. They know the fandom so well they made an episode based on us (10x05, FanFiction) that actually depicted us accurately (quite? somewhat? opinions digress) and with love. They acknowledged us, in canon. Literally told us through the words of Dean himself that they had their version and we had ours and it was okay. Such a thing was unthinkable when Robin started writing. The concepts of headcanon and canon and the enormous difference between them is something relatively recent, as well. Perhaps there is something there too, the clash of traditional writing against current writing. And I really don’t think she has, but the years and the constant contact with the fans may have mellowed her hatred a bit (a girl can hope?).

And i’ll shut up now because this is already long. If I ever have time (and the balls) to actually word my arguments better and put it up here (not likely), I’ll be glad to keep discussing this. (if i don’t write but y’all wanna talk to me go ahead anyway)

[whorchataaa]

Podcast: Does Law Enforcement Need Mental Health Care?

Today’s show takes a good hard look at police culture as a whole. What type of personality is drawn to a career in law enforcement? What are officers taught in the academy? Why do they receive so little mental health care when they face so much trauma on the job? These are just a few of the areas that our guest, mental health advocate Gabriel Nathan, lays bare.

Join us as we discuss the basic foundations of law enforcement and how Gabriel believes the profession needs to evolve to keep up with the times.

We want to hear from you — Please fill out our listener survey by clicking the graphic above!

SUBSCRIBE & REVIEW

  Guest information for ‘Gabriel Nathan – Police MH’ Podcast Episode

Gabriel Nathan is an author, editor, actor, and a mental health and suicide awareness advocate. He is Editor in Chief of OC87 Recovery Diaries, an online publication that features stories of mental health, empowerment, and change. Recently, OC87 Recovery Diaries produced a unique film series called “Beneath the Vest: First Responder Mental Health” that features candid and moving recovery stories from firefighters, EMS personnel, law enforcement, dispatchers, and a crisis intervention specialist instructor. These films are being used by first responder agencies across the U. S. and by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. 

Independent of his work at OC87 Recovery Diaries, Gabe raises mental health awareness, generates conversations around suicide and its prevention, and spreads a message of hope with his 1963 Volkswagen Beetle, Herbie the Love Bug replica that bears the number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline on its rear window. Gabriel lives in a suburb of Philadelphia with his wife, twins, a Basset hound named Tennessee, a long-haired German Shepherd named Sadie, and his Herbie. You can view Gabriel’s TEDx Talk on his approach to suicide awareness here. Gabriel and Herbie teamed up to

produce a documentary film about their suicide awareness mission; you can view the entire film and learn more information about Gabriel, Herbie, and suicide awareness here. You can also follow Gabriel and Herbie on IG @lovebugtrumpshate. 

About The Psych Central Podcast Host

Gabe Howard is an award-winning writer and speaker who lives with bipolar disorder. He is the author of the popular book, Mental Illness is an Asshole and other Observations, available from Amazon; signed copies are also available directly from the author. To learn more about Gabe, please visit his website, gabehoward.com.

Computer Generated Transcript for ‘Gabriel Nathan – Police MH’ Episode

Editor’s Note: Please be mindful that this transcript has been computer generated and therefore may contain inaccuracies and grammar errors. Thank you.

Announcer: You’re listening to the Psych Central Podcast, where guest experts in the field of psychology and mental health share thought-provoking information using plain, everyday language. Here’s your host, Gabe Howard.

Gabe Howard: Hello, everyone, and welcome to this week’s episode of The Psych Central Podcast, I’m your host, Gabe Howard, and calling into the show today we have Gabriel Nathan. Gabriel is the executive director of OC87 Recovery Diaries, and they produced a film series called Beneath the Vest: First Responder Mental Health. And it features police officers, EMS personnel, dispatchers, fire service, all individuals talking about trauma and complex PTSD. Gabriel, welcome to the show.

Gabriel Nathan: Hi, and thanks for having me. It’s great to be here.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, today we’re going to be talking about law enforcement reform, and I know that you have a lot of thoughts on the subject.

Gabriel Nathan: First of all, before I really get into the weeds of the question, what I have found is whenever you are taking a position that is critical in any way of law enforcement or attempts to raise questions even about the way law enforcement agencies do anything, it is extremely important to establish your own bona fides. Because anybody who steps up to challenge law enforcement is immediately regarded with suspicion, paranoia, is dismissed as, quote, libtard, troll, anti-cop antifa, whatever. I’m none of those things. I am someone who, for the last 20 years has been an advocate for slain police officers and their families through editorials, commentaries in newspapers. I have attended over 10 police funerals in Philadelphia down to Maryland. I have done a lot of advocacy work for law enforcement in regard to mental health of first responders. I’m very well aware of the suicide rate for police officers. I am someone who knows law enforcement culture. I am someone who has a respect for police officers and what they do. And so I just want people to know that I am doing this from a place of love and concern and from a position of someone who believes ardently that there absolutely needs to be change and radical reimagining of law enforcement across the board.

Gabe Howard: Thank you, Gabriel, for saying all that, and I agree with many of your points, and I want to point out that you were a recent guest on another podcast that I have the pleasure of hosting, Not Crazy. And you had so much to say, well, it spilled over into a second podcast. I strongly encourage all of our listeners to head over to PsychCentral.com/NotCrazy and check out that interview. All right, Gabriel, to get started, you believe that in many ways we’re recruiting the wrong people and that a lot of our problems start early, even before police officers get into the academy.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, look at the people who go into law enforcement. OK, a lot of people decide they want to be cops when they’re children. They’re watching shows like Cops, they’re watching shows like

Law & Order. They’re watching Lethal Weapon movies. Even as far as Hill Street Blues. I would say that this problem started with Hill Street Blues, the opening credits of Hill Street Blues. I love the music. And then the garage door opens and the Plymouth Fury is in the garage with the red lights bursting out of the garage. It’s exciting, right? So who is drawn to that profession? Action junkies. It’s people who want that adrenaline rush. And then we put them in situations where they’re in a constant state of hyper arousal. They’re always looking around. They’re doing the head swivel. You know, is someone going to hurt me, is someone going to shoot me? In a twenty five year career, most police officers never fire their weapon, never fire their weapon once. Many, many police officers never pull their weapon. And yet that’s the kind of human being that is drawn to that profession. And I have had people tell me, well, we pull in people who are really resilient. Well, is that what you’re doing? Or are you pulling in people who are craving action and are not necessarily maybe the most empathic people? Because a law enforcement agency can’t function if a police officer responds to a call and then starts falling apart emotionally because they can’t process what they saw. So maybe law enforcement is either consciously or subconsciously trying to pull people in who maybe don’t have that kind of empathic response. That’s not who I want riding around in a patrol car with a firearm and the power of arrest.

Gabe Howard: People who are attracted to law enforcement are more often than not white men. Do you think targeting women and people of color to become police officers and diversifying the police force, would that help?

Gabriel Nathan: It’s a start, but there’s even problems with that. There are women in law enforcement and there are minorities in law enforcement. But what I hear about individuals who identify as female or who are minorities, it’s that they have to work twice as hard and be twice as aggressive on the street so that they can prove that they belong in that culture, that they can prove themselves to their FTO’s. That’s Field Training Officer, which, by the way, Derek Chauvin, who killed George Floyd, he was an FTO.

Gabe Howard: Oh, I did not realize that.

Gabriel Nathan: Yeah. To prove to their colleagues and the veterans on the force that they can be there and that black officers say that they are even tougher on black members of their community so they can show I’m really blue, I’m really with you. So there’s all of that kind of bulls**t that is going on in law enforcement culture, even when you’re bringing on minorities. Even when you have black commanders, there are still acts of racism, acts of racism perpetrated against officers, not just the public. Right. So this is still happening. Yes, law enforcement has a reputation of being traditionally a white, Catholic, boys’ club. That is changing, but it is still changing very slowly. Police departments are still not representative of the racial and ethnic makeup of most of their communities. We are still living in a situation where police officers in a lot of places can live outside of the community where they police. So you have law enforcement officers policing really impoverished areas, but they’re living in nicer suburbs. So they get to go home. They don’t really have an investment in their community. They don’t really know the ins and outs of their community. Over and over again, they see the criminal element of the community, but they don’t interact with the law abiding citizens. So I find that incredibly problematic.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, we’re hearing a lot about defund the police. Can you talk about what that means? Because I believe a lot of people believe this just means the police are going to go away and it’s going to be the Wild West.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s never like there is not someone available, right? And that’s what everyone who’s freaking out about all the stuff on the police thing and putting these absurd commercials where there’s a phone ringing, ringing, ringing incessantly. Yes, 911. What’s your emergency? We’re sorry. Due to all the liberals who want to defund the police, there’s no one here to respond to your. Horses**t. That’s not reality. And it’s not reality now, and it won’t be reality either if we radically reimagine law enforcement. Nobody out there in the Black Lives Matter movement or in any advocacy movement wants someone to get hurt because help is not available for them.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, I want to pivot really hard right now and talk about the mental health of the police officers. Society, we have been told, since the beginning, that policing is a dangerous job. It’s a job filled with worry and trauma and stress. So it would occur to me, or I would think, that mental health training for police officers to address their own mental health would start at the academy. Is this the case?

Gabriel Nathan: The majority of training at the academy, they’re focused on learning laws and municipal codes, they’re focused on going to the gun range. They’re doing EVOC, which is Emergency Vehicle Operator Course training. That’s really what it’s about. It’s about self-defense and watching your six and watching all these videos over and over and over again of police officers getting killed during traffic stops, really scaring the bejesus out of you. OK, that’s what academy training is like. They don’t really address at all the trauma that police officers are going to experience. They don’t address the issue of police suicide. They don’t address all of that stuff. And they also don’t really address deescalating situations. It’s all about control. How do you control a suspect? How do you take control of a situation? How do you take command of a scene? The police academy curriculum is very, very full. And we know in Germany it takes three years to become a police officer. In other places, it takes two years or a year and a half. My police academy curriculum, it was full time, and it was nine months. But nowhere in that nine months curriculum was there room for crisis intervention, de-escalation, signs and symptoms of mental illness, all that kind of stuff. That’s all taught later.

Gabe Howard: I just want to point out that every state is different, and in many municipalities it takes longer to become a hairstylist than it does to become a police officer.

Gabriel Nathan: Correct, yes.

Gabe Howard: You said at the academy level there’s not very much mental health training, is that because there’s so much more going on?

Gabriel Nathan: It’s that there’s so much going on, but I also think there is, there’s a problem. There’s a disconnect, I think, between the governing bodies who create these police academy curricula and the realities of what’s actually happening on the street. So much of police officers’ time is spent dealing with mental health calls and psychiatric emergencies. If police officers all over the nation are saying this is

what we are spending so much of our time doing, that’s changing. But the academy curriculum is staying the same. They are not recognizing that, wow, we really need to refocus and reshift the majority of what we’re spending our time teaching these officers. We need to be more responsive. Unfortunately, police culture, in my experience, like the military, like religion, and I really do look at policing as a religion. Policing has deep Catholic roots. It is one of those institutions that changes very, very slowly. Like in the Catholic Church, when you have priests that act malevolently, you hide them. Sometimes in police departments, in a large police department, you move a problem officer to a different precinct or to a different duty. It’s the same kind of thing. They’re both steeped in rituals. And so unfortunately, when you have a culture that is so closed and is so insular and is so paranoid about any attempts to change it, they’re going to be very, very resistant to evolution. And when you have a society that is evolving and that is changing, the police need to change with that. And they ain’t about doing that, and particularly the governing bodies that create academy curricula, that changes very, very, very slowly.

Gabe Howard: Now, when you say that the police culture has these traits, they’re very insular, they’re protected from outside criticism, why do you think that is?

Gabriel Nathan: So the first and again, I’m just going to say this is my personal opinion based on things that I know and I speak from my own experience and blah, blah, blah. OK, so that aside, here is why I believe that law enforcement is resistant to change and resistant to outside influences. This is a classic us versus them situation. Any time you criticize a police officer or any time you try to raise a question about things, the response is you don’t know what it’s like. You don’t know what it’s like to walk in my shoes. You don’t know what it’s like to be on a dark road at 3:00 a.m. behind a car with tinted windows and backup is 20 minutes. I’ve heard this a lot from cops and they’re right. I don’t know what that’s like and I can’t know what that’s like. Nobody can know what it’s like to be me either. We can have empathy and we can try to understand, but we don’t know what it’s like to be a police officer. OK, so that’s just a fact. That doesn’t mean that we have no right to question and that we have no right to say do we think this could be done differently or perhaps done better?

Gabriel Nathan: You hear about the blue wall all the time. So the blue wall is a very symbolic metaphor. It is really meant to close ranks and we protect our own. You’re not us and you don’t understand. It’s not really the police against the criminals. It’s the police against the civilians. Anybody who does not wear blue is the enemy because we don’t get it. That is why there is resistance to civilian review boards of line of duty shootings. That is why there is resistance to any politician who raises any issue. They’re anti blue. You’re against us. If you’re not in lockstep with the FOP and all of that stuff, you’re the enemy. And I have seen police officers turn against me. They don’t care about the twenty years of advocacy work that I’ve done. They don’t care about the mental health videos that I produced, the voice that I’ve given to law enforcement officers who are struggling. They don’t give a damn because the second you fall out of line, you’re history.

Gabe Howard: I’ve been really surprised to learn that the suicide rate among law enforcement officers is just scary high. I recently had the opportunity to emcee an event that had a police captain. He’s been a police officer for over 25 years, and he does these trainings talking about how we provide zero mental health care for police officers. And one of the things that he points out is that we’re constantly training

them how to be in a high level shootout, like a war zone in their own city, that the majority of police officers will never be in. A majority of police officers never even pull their guns. But we spend so much time training them for that. But the reality is pretty much every police officer will at some point have to inform somebody that their loved one has died. They respond to traffic accidents and, well, accidents in general all the time. They have seen passed away people in the wild. And we give them nothing for that. There’s no mental health follow up. We don’t ask them if they’re OK. When they go home at the end of the day, after seeing a dead child who died in a car accident, they look at their own children. They look at their own families. They look at their own spouses. One of your big advocacy points is getting mental health care for law enforcement. Do you believe that police officers are starting to be more receptive to the idea that they themselves need mental health care?

Gabriel Nathan: That I believe we are making progress in, and I feel like there is an older generation of law enforcement officers who just need to retire so we can have more evolved and emotionally aware people take over. This older generation of police officers is the suck it up, buttercup. Be a man. You’re fine. We all have to see this s**t. This is part of the job. Whatever. There is a newer generation of more emotionally intelligent police officers coming up through the ranks who have a better understanding of, oh, my God, like, yes, we do have to see this kind of stuff, but we also have to deal with it. We also have to emotionally process it. We don’t just swallow it and then go to the bar and drink with our buddies and try to wash it all away with alcohol so we can get up and do it the next morning. We need to be able to talk about this stuff. And there are crisis intervention, stress management teams and there are trauma debriefings. And I’m not trying to criticize what you just said, but it’s not just dead children. They see all kinds of stuff that is unimaginable.

Gabriel Nathan: And yes, nobody tells them about how that’s going to impact them. Nobody tells them, hey, by the way, did you know that simply by having constant access to lethal means on your hip twenty four hours a day that you are at extreme risk for taking your own life? Nobody talks about that kind of stuff. When I hear people say cops are there to protect and serve, I laugh because they can’t even protect themselves. They’re not even given the tools to help themselves. Yet we live in this fantasy world where they’re here to help and protect us. They’re all falling apart and where are the resources to help them? And so that really burns me when we have these hiring practices that are ineffective and then they’re not given the tools to emotionally cope with the things that they see. We know that there’s rampant alcoholism and drug use. We know that they kill themselves more than they are killed or die in accidents in the last three years that there are stats. So we know all these things. And yet we live in this fantasy world where, hey, we’re fine. Don’t you criticize us. Don’t you come at us. Your whole profession is rife with problems, really systemic issues.

Gabe Howard: We’ll be right back after we hear from our sponsors.

Sponsor Message: This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp.com. Secure, convenient, and affordable online counseling. Our counselors are licensed, accredited professionals. Anything you share is confidential. Schedule secure video or phone sessions, plus chat and text with your therapist whenever you feel it’s needed. A month of online therapy often costs less than a single traditional face to face session. Go to BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral and experience seven days of free therapy to see if online counseling is right for you. BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral.

Gabe Howard: And we’re back talking about police officers and mental health with Gabriel Nathan. I don’t think that the general public is aware that more police officers die by suicide every year than by a criminal act. And our culture is very pro law enforcement. We want to help law enforcement. We want to keep law enforcement safe. This really leads me to my question of, as a society, are we doing enough to protect police officers from suicide? Is the police force doing enough to protect their law enforcement officers from suicide? Because I don’t think the general public is aware that police officers are in harm’s way. They’re not protecting themselves from this.

Gabriel Nathan: Right, well, I believe there are pockets of change in that area. My friend and colleague Michelle Monzo, who works at MCES, is one of those change agents in terms of educating law enforcement officers, not just about de-escalation and crisis intervention, but about their own mental health and how their own mental health is going to be impacted by the things that they see and do and encouraging them to seek help. Sunny Provetto in Vermont, he’s a change agent there. There are little pockets of things that are happening that are good, but systemically, in terms of the law enforcement culture, no. That change is not happening. And I think it is a huge black eye for police culture that organizationally from day one in the academy or even pre day one, when we get in terms of screening and who is applying to be police officers, these changes are not happening. And it’s inexcusable, really.

Gabe Howard: You know, Gabriel, you talk about action junkies a lot, and I do understand what you’re saying, and I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, and I just keep thinking about the fire department. Aren’t they action junkies as well? We have movies like Backdraft and we have a TV show, Chicago Fire. And it’s sort of pop culture versioned as well. So does the fire department have these same problems when it comes to firefighters’ mental health? They’re responding to emergency calls. They see people lose their homes and their lives. They have to deal with death. Is there anything that we can learn from the way the fire department is handling it or aren’t they doing a good job either?

Gabriel Nathan: Well, for sure, so they’re the first responder culture that I talk about. I feel like it encompasses police officers, firefighters, emergency medical technicians, paramedics. So, yeah, all of the people in those cultures share a lot of common draws to their profession. And they also share a lot of common elements when it comes to their own mental health and also a lot of common stigmas related to mental health. There’s a lot of that you know, oh, you’re wussy, you’re blah blah blah. That kind of stuff in those cultures, too. And that is changing slowly. But that is still a part of that culture. And we are also losing more firefighters to suicide than we’re losing in line of duty fires. So that situation is happening. Absolutely. The difference is that firefighters don’t have a gun on their hip. They don’t have that constant access to lethal means. So they don’t have the means to take their own lives. You don’t hear about firefighters taking their own lives in their fire truck, but you do hear about police officers taking their own lives in their radio cars, parked outside of the squad house. But, yes, there is the same problem with firefighters and other first responders having trouble processing things that they see and things that they experience and also having relationship issues.

Gabriel Nathan: A lot of suicide. It’s not just about quote the things we see. And I think that’s a stereotype about first responder culture. A lot of it has to do with relationship problems and that also gets to the us versus them thing when a first responder has a civilian spouse. And this is why a lot of first responders are drawn to first responders as romantic partners. The civilian spouse, you don’t get me. You don’t understand. You don’t know what I see. You don’t know what it’s like. Well, but the first responders is also partly responsible for that problem because they don’t talk about it and they think they’re protecting their spouse by not talking about all the things that they see and experience when really what they’re doing is they’re purposefully widening that gulf between themselves and their romantic partner by not sharing, by not opening up. Right. So that problem is endemic, I think, to all manner of first responders, not just police.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, during the research for this show, I looked up the number of police officers who were killed in the line of duty, and I just assumes that all of them had died during the commission of a felonious act. I literally conjured up this idea of a shootout, but I was surprised to learn that there was a decent percentage of people who had died in a car accident.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, yes.

Gabe Howard: And it was higher. The number of police officers who died in a car accident versus the commission of a violent crime was higher.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, that’s exactly right. So there’s a couple of reasons for that. First of all, what are police officers doing all day long? They’re riding around in their radio cars. So the more you’re doing that, the more likely you are to be killed in a car accident. Now, who’s making patrol cars? American car manufacturers. OK, the Chevy Caprice, which was the favorite vehicle of law enforcement agencies from the late 70s, all the way through the mid 90s. The Ford Crown Victoria, which was a mainstay in police departments from the 80s all the way through, I think they stopped making the police package Crown Vic in like 2018. These were very unsafe vehicles. The last generation Crown Victoria had a design flaw where if it was hit from behind, the fuel tank would ignite.

Gabe Howard: Wow, really?

Gabriel Nathan: And Ford created this special fire suppression system embedded in the trunk to deal with this issue, and law enforcement agencies had to change the way they conduct traffic stops to position the police vehicle. They changed the way traffic stops were done to prevent police cars from being hit by behind when they were stopping vehicles on the side of the road. Because police officers were being killed in car accidents where they were rear ended in their Crown Vics and they would explode.

Gabe Howard: Oh, that’s terrible.

Gabriel Nathan: So there are much, much safer cars out there. But who’s getting bids by police departments? It’s Ford and General Motors and they’re making, frankly, s***y cars. The Chevrolet Caprice in the early 90s had door mounted safety belts. The shoulder belt was mounted on the door of

the car, not on the door sill. So police cars would crash, the door would open and the seatbelt was not restraining the officers. The officer would fly out or in some cases be decapitated by the seatbelt. So, again, you’re having these s****y cars designed for law enforcement when they’re not safe.

Gabe Howard: That’s unacceptable.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s just another example of police departments not taking the lives of their own officers seriously. We’ll just buy whatever s****y car is cheapest to buy. Whatever Michigan State Police, who conducts the test for police cars, whatever they tell us to buy. There are so many problems in law enforcement culture down to what they drive in and all the way on up.

Gabe Howard: When the general public hears killed in the line of duty, they think, shoot out, they don’t think car accident. And I was also surprised to learn about the majority of police officers who were killed in car accidents who were not wearing seatbelts.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, yes.

Gabe Howard: It seems preventable, just wear a seatbelt. I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that law enforcement isn’t taking care of their mental health if they’re not even wearing seatbelts. Seatbelts are well understood to save lives, and mental health is a more nebulous concept.

Gabriel Nathan: Yeah, it’s again, it’s the stereotypical macho culture. You know, my dad, who is an Israeli army veteran, he fought in two wars. He’s a very macho guy. I had to sit in the backseat of his car and cry until he would put his seatbelt on because he thought it wasn’t macho. Well, now, well, Gabriel, what do I need a seatbelt for? What’s going to happen to me? Right. That same culture that just needs to kind of go away.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, this has been an incredible discussion. Thank you so much for hanging with me and thank you for coming over from the Not Crazy podcast. Which, by the way, everybody can check out more from Gabriel Nathan at PsychCentral.com/NotCrazy. Or just look up Not Crazy on your favorite podcast player. Gabriel, tell us about OC87 Recovery Diaries.

Gabriel Nathan: Sure. So I’m the editor in chief of OC87 Recovery Diaries, it’s a nonprofit mental health publication. We tell stories of mental health, empowerment and change in two ways. First person mental health recovery essays. We publish a brand new personal essay every single week. And we also produce short subject, professionally made documentary films all about people living with mental health challenges. You can see all of our mental health films and read all of our mental health essays at OC87RecoveryDiaries.org. And if you want to follow me, really the only place to do that is on Instagram. I’m at Lovebug Trumps Hate and I would love to, I’d love to be your friend.

Gabe Howard: Lovebug Trumps Hate is all about Gabriel driving around in his Herbie replica. It’s a love bug replica. The pictures are incredible and the suicide prevention that Gabriel does, is incredible. Look, I just love Herbie, but also check out the OC87 Recovery Diaries website, because there is where you can find Beneath the Vest. That entire series is on there completely free. And Gabriel’s not actually in it. It’s all about actual first responders.

Gabriel Nathan: Correct, I’m not in it at all. It’s police officers, a dispatcher, firefighters, EMS personnel and my friend Michelle Monzo, who is the crisis intervention specialist trainer at MCES.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, thank you. Thank you once again.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s a privilege. Thank you for having me on.

Gabe Howard: And thank you, listeners. Remember, you can get one week of free, convenient, affordable, private online counseling any time anywhere simply by visiting BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral. We’ll see everyone next week.

Announcer: You’ve been listening to The Psych Central Podcast. Want your audience to be wowed at your next event? Feature an appearance and LIVE RECORDING of the Psych Central Podcast right from your stage! For more details, or to book an event, please email us at show@psychcentral.com. Previous episodes can be found at PsychCentral.com/Show or on your favorite podcast player. Psych Central is the internet’s oldest and largest independent mental health website run by mental health professionals. Overseen by Dr. John Grohol, Psych Central offers trusted resources and quizzes to help answer your questions about mental health, personality, psychotherapy, and more. Please visit us today at PsychCentral.com.  To learn more about our host, Gabe Howard, please visit his website at gabehoward.com. Thank you for listening and please share with your friends, family, and followers.

The post Podcast: Does Law Enforcement Need Mental Health Care? first appeared on World of Psychology.

from https://ift.tt/2EBFwM2 Check out https://peterlegyel.wordpress.com/

[ashley-unicorn]

Podcast: Does Law Enforcement Need Mental Health Care?

Today’s show takes a good hard look at police culture as a whole. What type of personality is drawn to a career in law enforcement? What are officers taught in the academy? Why do they receive so little mental health care when they face so much trauma on the job? These are just a few of the areas that our guest, mental health advocate Gabriel Nathan, lays bare.

Join us as we discuss the basic foundations of law enforcement and how Gabriel believes the profession needs to evolve to keep up with the times.

We want to hear from you — Please fill out our listener survey by clicking the graphic above!

SUBSCRIBE & REVIEW

  Guest information for ‘Gabriel Nathan – Police MH’ Podcast Episode

Gabriel Nathan is an author, editor, actor, and a mental health and suicide awareness advocate. He is Editor in Chief of OC87 Recovery Diaries, an online publication that features stories of mental health, empowerment, and change. Recently, OC87 Recovery Diaries produced a unique film series called “Beneath the Vest: First Responder Mental Health” that features candid and moving recovery stories from firefighters, EMS personnel, law enforcement, dispatchers, and a crisis intervention specialist instructor. These films are being used by first responder agencies across the U. S. and by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. 

Independent of his work at OC87 Recovery Diaries, Gabe raises mental health awareness, generates conversations around suicide and its prevention, and spreads a message of hope with his 1963 Volkswagen Beetle, Herbie the Love Bug replica that bears the number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline on its rear window. Gabriel lives in a suburb of Philadelphia with his wife, twins, a Basset hound named Tennessee, a long-haired German Shepherd named Sadie, and his Herbie. You can view Gabriel’s TEDx Talk on his approach to suicide awareness here. Gabriel and Herbie teamed up to

produce a documentary film about their suicide awareness mission; you can view the entire film and learn more information about Gabriel, Herbie, and suicide awareness here. You can also follow Gabriel and Herbie on IG @lovebugtrumpshate. 

About The Psych Central Podcast Host

Gabe Howard is an award-winning writer and speaker who lives with bipolar disorder. He is the author of the popular book, Mental Illness is an Asshole and other Observations, available from Amazon; signed copies are also available directly from the author. To learn more about Gabe, please visit his website, gabehoward.com.

Computer Generated Transcript for ‘Gabriel Nathan – Police MH’ Episode

Editor’s Note: Please be mindful that this transcript has been computer generated and therefore may contain inaccuracies and grammar errors. Thank you.

Announcer: You’re listening to the Psych Central Podcast, where guest experts in the field of psychology and mental health share thought-provoking information using plain, everyday language. Here’s your host, Gabe Howard.

Gabe Howard: Hello, everyone, and welcome to this week’s episode of The Psych Central Podcast, I’m your host, Gabe Howard, and calling into the show today we have Gabriel Nathan. Gabriel is the executive director of OC87 Recovery Diaries, and they produced a film series called Beneath the Vest: First Responder Mental Health. And it features police officers, EMS personnel, dispatchers, fire service, all individuals talking about trauma and complex PTSD. Gabriel, welcome to the show.

Gabriel Nathan: Hi, and thanks for having me. It’s great to be here.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, today we’re going to be talking about law enforcement reform, and I know that you have a lot of thoughts on the subject.

Gabriel Nathan: First of all, before I really get into the weeds of the question, what I have found is whenever you are taking a position that is critical in any way of law enforcement or attempts to raise questions even about the way law enforcement agencies do anything, it is extremely important to establish your own bona fides. Because anybody who steps up to challenge law enforcement is immediately regarded with suspicion, paranoia, is dismissed as, quote, libtard, troll, anti-cop antifa, whatever. I’m none of those things. I am someone who, for the last 20 years has been an advocate for slain police officers and their families through editorials, commentaries in newspapers. I have attended over 10 police funerals in Philadelphia down to Maryland. I have done a lot of advocacy work for law enforcement in regard to mental health of first responders. I’m very well aware of the suicide rate for police officers. I am someone who knows law enforcement culture. I am someone who has a respect for police officers and what they do. And so I just want people to know that I am doing this from a place of love and concern and from a position of someone who believes ardently that there absolutely needs to be change and radical reimagining of law enforcement across the board.

Gabe Howard: Thank you, Gabriel, for saying all that, and I agree with many of your points, and I want to point out that you were a recent guest on another podcast that I have the pleasure of hosting, Not Crazy. And you had so much to say, well, it spilled over into a second podcast. I strongly encourage all of our listeners to head over to PsychCentral.com/NotCrazy and check out that interview. All right, Gabriel, to get started, you believe that in many ways we’re recruiting the wrong people and that a lot of our problems start early, even before police officers get into the academy.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, look at the people who go into law enforcement. OK, a lot of people decide they want to be cops when they’re children. They’re watching shows like Cops, they’re watching shows like

Law & Order. They’re watching Lethal Weapon movies. Even as far as Hill Street Blues. I would say that this problem started with Hill Street Blues, the opening credits of Hill Street Blues. I love the music. And then the garage door opens and the Plymouth Fury is in the garage with the red lights bursting out of the garage. It’s exciting, right? So who is drawn to that profession? Action junkies. It’s people who want that adrenaline rush. And then we put them in situations where they’re in a constant state of hyper arousal. They’re always looking around. They’re doing the head swivel. You know, is someone going to hurt me, is someone going to shoot me? In a twenty five year career, most police officers never fire their weapon, never fire their weapon once. Many, many police officers never pull their weapon. And yet that’s the kind of human being that is drawn to that profession. And I have had people tell me, well, we pull in people who are really resilient. Well, is that what you’re doing? Or are you pulling in people who are craving action and are not necessarily maybe the most empathic people? Because a law enforcement agency can’t function if a police officer responds to a call and then starts falling apart emotionally because they can’t process what they saw. So maybe law enforcement is either consciously or subconsciously trying to pull people in who maybe don’t have that kind of empathic response. That’s not who I want riding around in a patrol car with a firearm and the power of arrest.

Gabe Howard: People who are attracted to law enforcement are more often than not white men. Do you think targeting women and people of color to become police officers and diversifying the police force, would that help?

Gabriel Nathan: It’s a start, but there’s even problems with that. There are women in law enforcement and there are minorities in law enforcement. But what I hear about individuals who identify as female or who are minorities, it’s that they have to work twice as hard and be twice as aggressive on the street so that they can prove that they belong in that culture, that they can prove themselves to their FTO’s. That’s Field Training Officer, which, by the way, Derek Chauvin, who killed George Floyd, he was an FTO.

Gabe Howard: Oh, I did not realize that.

Gabriel Nathan: Yeah. To prove to their colleagues and the veterans on the force that they can be there and that black officers say that they are even tougher on black members of their community so they can show I’m really blue, I’m really with you. So there’s all of that kind of bulls**t that is going on in law enforcement culture, even when you’re bringing on minorities. Even when you have black commanders, there are still acts of racism, acts of racism perpetrated against officers, not just the public. Right. So this is still happening. Yes, law enforcement has a reputation of being traditionally a white, Catholic, boys’ club. That is changing, but it is still changing very slowly. Police departments are still not representative of the racial and ethnic makeup of most of their communities. We are still living in a situation where police officers in a lot of places can live outside of the community where they police. So you have law enforcement officers policing really impoverished areas, but they’re living in nicer suburbs. So they get to go home. They don’t really have an investment in their community. They don’t really know the ins and outs of their community. Over and over again, they see the criminal element of the community, but they don’t interact with the law abiding citizens. So I find that incredibly problematic.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, we’re hearing a lot about defund the police. Can you talk about what that means? Because I believe a lot of people believe this just means the police are going to go away and it’s going to be the Wild West.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s never like there is not someone available, right? And that’s what everyone who’s freaking out about all the stuff on the police thing and putting these absurd commercials where there’s a phone ringing, ringing, ringing incessantly. Yes, 911. What’s your emergency? We’re sorry. Due to all the liberals who want to defund the police, there’s no one here to respond to your. Horses**t. That’s not reality. And it’s not reality now, and it won’t be reality either if we radically reimagine law enforcement. Nobody out there in the Black Lives Matter movement or in any advocacy movement wants someone to get hurt because help is not available for them.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, I want to pivot really hard right now and talk about the mental health of the police officers. Society, we have been told, since the beginning, that policing is a dangerous job. It’s a job filled with worry and trauma and stress. So it would occur to me, or I would think, that mental health training for police officers to address their own mental health would start at the academy. Is this the case?

Gabriel Nathan: The majority of training at the academy, they’re focused on learning laws and municipal codes, they’re focused on going to the gun range. They’re doing EVOC, which is Emergency Vehicle Operator Course training. That’s really what it’s about. It’s about self-defense and watching your six and watching all these videos over and over and over again of police officers getting killed during traffic stops, really scaring the bejesus out of you. OK, that’s what academy training is like. They don’t really address at all the trauma that police officers are going to experience. They don’t address the issue of police suicide. They don’t address all of that stuff. And they also don’t really address deescalating situations. It’s all about control. How do you control a suspect? How do you take control of a situation? How do you take command of a scene? The police academy curriculum is very, very full. And we know in Germany it takes three years to become a police officer. In other places, it takes two years or a year and a half. My police academy curriculum, it was full time, and it was nine months. But nowhere in that nine months curriculum was there room for crisis intervention, de-escalation, signs and symptoms of mental illness, all that kind of stuff. That’s all taught later.

Gabe Howard: I just want to point out that every state is different, and in many municipalities it takes longer to become a hairstylist than it does to become a police officer.

Gabriel Nathan: Correct, yes.

Gabe Howard: You said at the academy level there’s not very much mental health training, is that because there’s so much more going on?

Gabriel Nathan: It’s that there’s so much going on, but I also think there is, there’s a problem. There’s a disconnect, I think, between the governing bodies who create these police academy curricula and the realities of what’s actually happening on the street. So much of police officers’ time is spent dealing with mental health calls and psychiatric emergencies. If police officers all over the nation are saying this is

what we are spending so much of our time doing, that’s changing. But the academy curriculum is staying the same. They are not recognizing that, wow, we really need to refocus and reshift the majority of what we’re spending our time teaching these officers. We need to be more responsive. Unfortunately, police culture, in my experience, like the military, like religion, and I really do look at policing as a religion. Policing has deep Catholic roots. It is one of those institutions that changes very, very slowly. Like in the Catholic Church, when you have priests that act malevolently, you hide them. Sometimes in police departments, in a large police department, you move a problem officer to a different precinct or to a different duty. It’s the same kind of thing. They’re both steeped in rituals. And so unfortunately, when you have a culture that is so closed and is so insular and is so paranoid about any attempts to change it, they’re going to be very, very resistant to evolution. And when you have a society that is evolving and that is changing, the police need to change with that. And they ain’t about doing that, and particularly the governing bodies that create academy curricula, that changes very, very, very slowly.

Gabe Howard: Now, when you say that the police culture has these traits, they’re very insular, they’re protected from outside criticism, why do you think that is?

Gabriel Nathan: So the first and again, I’m just going to say this is my personal opinion based on things that I know and I speak from my own experience and blah, blah, blah. OK, so that aside, here is why I believe that law enforcement is resistant to change and resistant to outside influences. This is a classic us versus them situation. Any time you criticize a police officer or any time you try to raise a question about things, the response is you don’t know what it’s like. You don’t know what it’s like to walk in my shoes. You don’t know what it’s like to be on a dark road at 3:00 a.m. behind a car with tinted windows and backup is 20 minutes. I’ve heard this a lot from cops and they’re right. I don’t know what that’s like and I can’t know what that’s like. Nobody can know what it’s like to be me either. We can have empathy and we can try to understand, but we don’t know what it’s like to be a police officer. OK, so that’s just a fact. That doesn’t mean that we have no right to question and that we have no right to say do we think this could be done differently or perhaps done better?

Gabriel Nathan: You hear about the blue wall all the time. So the blue wall is a very symbolic metaphor. It is really meant to close ranks and we protect our own. You’re not us and you don’t understand. It’s not really the police against the criminals. It’s the police against the civilians. Anybody who does not wear blue is the enemy because we don’t get it. That is why there is resistance to civilian review boards of line of duty shootings. That is why there is resistance to any politician who raises any issue. They’re anti blue. You’re against us. If you’re not in lockstep with the FOP and all of that stuff, you’re the enemy. And I have seen police officers turn against me. They don’t care about the twenty years of advocacy work that I’ve done. They don’t care about the mental health videos that I produced, the voice that I’ve given to law enforcement officers who are struggling. They don’t give a damn because the second you fall out of line, you’re history.

Gabe Howard: I’ve been really surprised to learn that the suicide rate among law enforcement officers is just scary high. I recently had the opportunity to emcee an event that had a police captain. He’s been a police officer for over 25 years, and he does these trainings talking about how we provide zero mental health care for police officers. And one of the things that he points out is that we’re constantly training

them how to be in a high level shootout, like a war zone in their own city, that the majority of police officers will never be in. A majority of police officers never even pull their guns. But we spend so much time training them for that. But the reality is pretty much every police officer will at some point have to inform somebody that their loved one has died. They respond to traffic accidents and, well, accidents in general all the time. They have seen passed away people in the wild. And we give them nothing for that. There’s no mental health follow up. We don’t ask them if they’re OK. When they go home at the end of the day, after seeing a dead child who died in a car accident, they look at their own children. They look at their own families. They look at their own spouses. One of your big advocacy points is getting mental health care for law enforcement. Do you believe that police officers are starting to be more receptive to the idea that they themselves need mental health care?

Gabriel Nathan: That I believe we are making progress in, and I feel like there is an older generation of law enforcement officers who just need to retire so we can have more evolved and emotionally aware people take over. This older generation of police officers is the suck it up, buttercup. Be a man. You’re fine. We all have to see this s**t. This is part of the job. Whatever. There is a newer generation of more emotionally intelligent police officers coming up through the ranks who have a better understanding of, oh, my God, like, yes, we do have to see this kind of stuff, but we also have to deal with it. We also have to emotionally process it. We don’t just swallow it and then go to the bar and drink with our buddies and try to wash it all away with alcohol so we can get up and do it the next morning. We need to be able to talk about this stuff. And there are crisis intervention, stress management teams and there are trauma debriefings. And I’m not trying to criticize what you just said, but it’s not just dead children. They see all kinds of stuff that is unimaginable.

Gabriel Nathan: And yes, nobody tells them about how that’s going to impact them. Nobody tells them, hey, by the way, did you know that simply by having constant access to lethal means on your hip twenty four hours a day that you are at extreme risk for taking your own life? Nobody talks about that kind of stuff. When I hear people say cops are there to protect and serve, I laugh because they can’t even protect themselves. They’re not even given the tools to help themselves. Yet we live in this fantasy world where they’re here to help and protect us. They’re all falling apart and where are the resources to help them? And so that really burns me when we have these hiring practices that are ineffective and then they’re not given the tools to emotionally cope with the things that they see. We know that there’s rampant alcoholism and drug use. We know that they kill themselves more than they are killed or die in accidents in the last three years that there are stats. So we know all these things. And yet we live in this fantasy world where, hey, we’re fine. Don’t you criticize us. Don’t you come at us. Your whole profession is rife with problems, really systemic issues.

Gabe Howard: We’ll be right back after we hear from our sponsors.

Sponsor Message: This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp.com. Secure, convenient, and affordable online counseling. Our counselors are licensed, accredited professionals. Anything you share is confidential. Schedule secure video or phone sessions, plus chat and text with your therapist whenever you feel it’s needed. A month of online therapy often costs less than a single traditional face to face session. Go to BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral and experience seven days of free therapy to see if online counseling is right for you. BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral.

Gabe Howard: And we’re back talking about police officers and mental health with Gabriel Nathan. I don’t think that the general public is aware that more police officers die by suicide every year than by a criminal act. And our culture is very pro law enforcement. We want to help law enforcement. We want to keep law enforcement safe. This really leads me to my question of, as a society, are we doing enough to protect police officers from suicide? Is the police force doing enough to protect their law enforcement officers from suicide? Because I don’t think the general public is aware that police officers are in harm’s way. They’re not protecting themselves from this.

Gabriel Nathan: Right, well, I believe there are pockets of change in that area. My friend and colleague Michelle Monzo, who works at MCES, is one of those change agents in terms of educating law enforcement officers, not just about de-escalation and crisis intervention, but about their own mental health and how their own mental health is going to be impacted by the things that they see and do and encouraging them to seek help. Sunny Provetto in Vermont, he’s a change agent there. There are little pockets of things that are happening that are good, but systemically, in terms of the law enforcement culture, no. That change is not happening. And I think it is a huge black eye for police culture that organizationally from day one in the academy or even pre day one, when we get in terms of screening and who is applying to be police officers, these changes are not happening. And it’s inexcusable, really.

Gabe Howard: You know, Gabriel, you talk about action junkies a lot, and I do understand what you’re saying, and I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, and I just keep thinking about the fire department. Aren’t they action junkies as well? We have movies like Backdraft and we have a TV show, Chicago Fire. And it’s sort of pop culture versioned as well. So does the fire department have these same problems when it comes to firefighters’ mental health? They’re responding to emergency calls. They see people lose their homes and their lives. They have to deal with death. Is there anything that we can learn from the way the fire department is handling it or aren’t they doing a good job either?

Gabriel Nathan: Well, for sure, so they’re the first responder culture that I talk about. I feel like it encompasses police officers, firefighters, emergency medical technicians, paramedics. So, yeah, all of the people in those cultures share a lot of common draws to their profession. And they also share a lot of common elements when it comes to their own mental health and also a lot of common stigmas related to mental health. There’s a lot of that you know, oh, you’re wussy, you’re blah blah blah. That kind of stuff in those cultures, too. And that is changing slowly. But that is still a part of that culture. And we are also losing more firefighters to suicide than we’re losing in line of duty fires. So that situation is happening. Absolutely. The difference is that firefighters don’t have a gun on their hip. They don’t have that constant access to lethal means. So they don’t have the means to take their own lives. You don’t hear about firefighters taking their own lives in their fire truck, but you do hear about police officers taking their own lives in their radio cars, parked outside of the squad house. But, yes, there is the same problem with firefighters and other first responders having trouble processing things that they see and things that they experience and also having relationship issues.

Gabriel Nathan: A lot of suicide. It’s not just about quote the things we see. And I think that’s a stereotype about first responder culture. A lot of it has to do with relationship problems and that also gets to the us versus them thing when a first responder has a civilian spouse. And this is why a lot of first responders are drawn to first responders as romantic partners. The civilian spouse, you don’t get me. You don’t understand. You don’t know what I see. You don’t know what it’s like. Well, but the first responders is also partly responsible for that problem because they don’t talk about it and they think they’re protecting their spouse by not talking about all the things that they see and experience when really what they’re doing is they’re purposefully widening that gulf between themselves and their romantic partner by not sharing, by not opening up. Right. So that problem is endemic, I think, to all manner of first responders, not just police.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, during the research for this show, I looked up the number of police officers who were killed in the line of duty, and I just assumes that all of them had died during the commission of a felonious act. I literally conjured up this idea of a shootout, but I was surprised to learn that there was a decent percentage of people who had died in a car accident.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, yes.

Gabe Howard: And it was higher. The number of police officers who died in a car accident versus the commission of a violent crime was higher.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, that’s exactly right. So there’s a couple of reasons for that. First of all, what are police officers doing all day long? They’re riding around in their radio cars. So the more you’re doing that, the more likely you are to be killed in a car accident. Now, who’s making patrol cars? American car manufacturers. OK, the Chevy Caprice, which was the favorite vehicle of law enforcement agencies from the late 70s, all the way through the mid 90s. The Ford Crown Victoria, which was a mainstay in police departments from the 80s all the way through, I think they stopped making the police package Crown Vic in like 2018. These were very unsafe vehicles. The last generation Crown Victoria had a design flaw where if it was hit from behind, the fuel tank would ignite.

Gabe Howard: Wow, really?

Gabriel Nathan: And Ford created this special fire suppression system embedded in the trunk to deal with this issue, and law enforcement agencies had to change the way they conduct traffic stops to position the police vehicle. They changed the way traffic stops were done to prevent police cars from being hit by behind when they were stopping vehicles on the side of the road. Because police officers were being killed in car accidents where they were rear ended in their Crown Vics and they would explode.

Gabe Howard: Oh, that’s terrible.

Gabriel Nathan: So there are much, much safer cars out there. But who’s getting bids by police departments? It’s Ford and General Motors and they’re making, frankly, s***y cars. The Chevrolet Caprice in the early 90s had door mounted safety belts. The shoulder belt was mounted on the door of

the car, not on the door sill. So police cars would crash, the door would open and the seatbelt was not restraining the officers. The officer would fly out or in some cases be decapitated by the seatbelt. So, again, you’re having these s****y cars designed for law enforcement when they’re not safe.

Gabe Howard: That’s unacceptable.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s just another example of police departments not taking the lives of their own officers seriously. We’ll just buy whatever s****y car is cheapest to buy. Whatever Michigan State Police, who conducts the test for police cars, whatever they tell us to buy. There are so many problems in law enforcement culture down to what they drive in and all the way on up.

Gabe Howard: When the general public hears killed in the line of duty, they think, shoot out, they don’t think car accident. And I was also surprised to learn about the majority of police officers who were killed in car accidents who were not wearing seatbelts.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, yes.

Gabe Howard: It seems preventable, just wear a seatbelt. I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that law enforcement isn’t taking care of their mental health if they’re not even wearing seatbelts. Seatbelts are well understood to save lives, and mental health is a more nebulous concept.

Gabriel Nathan: Yeah, it’s again, it’s the stereotypical macho culture. You know, my dad, who is an Israeli army veteran, he fought in two wars. He’s a very macho guy. I had to sit in the backseat of his car and cry until he would put his seatbelt on because he thought it wasn’t macho. Well, now, well, Gabriel, what do I need a seatbelt for? What’s going to happen to me? Right. That same culture that just needs to kind of go away.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, this has been an incredible discussion. Thank you so much for hanging with me and thank you for coming over from the Not Crazy podcast. Which, by the way, everybody can check out more from Gabriel Nathan at PsychCentral.com/NotCrazy. Or just look up Not Crazy on your favorite podcast player. Gabriel, tell us about OC87 Recovery Diaries.

Gabriel Nathan: Sure. So I’m the editor in chief of OC87 Recovery Diaries, it’s a nonprofit mental health publication. We tell stories of mental health, empowerment and change in two ways. First person mental health recovery essays. We publish a brand new personal essay every single week. And we also produce short subject, professionally made documentary films all about people living with mental health challenges. You can see all of our mental health films and read all of our mental health essays at OC87RecoveryDiaries.org. And if you want to follow me, really the only place to do that is on Instagram. I’m at Lovebug Trumps Hate and I would love to, I’d love to be your friend.

Gabe Howard: Lovebug Trumps Hate is all about Gabriel driving around in his Herbie replica. It’s a love bug replica. The pictures are incredible and the suicide prevention that Gabriel does, is incredible. Look, I just love Herbie, but also check out the OC87 Recovery Diaries website, because there is where you can find Beneath the Vest. That entire series is on there completely free. And Gabriel’s not actually in it. It’s all about actual first responders.

Gabriel Nathan: Correct, I’m not in it at all. It’s police officers, a dispatcher, firefighters, EMS personnel and my friend Michelle Monzo, who is the crisis intervention specialist trainer at MCES.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, thank you. Thank you once again.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s a privilege. Thank you for having me on.

Gabe Howard: And thank you, listeners. Remember, you can get one week of free, convenient, affordable, private online counseling any time anywhere simply by visiting BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral. We’ll see everyone next week.

Announcer: You’ve been listening to The Psych Central Podcast. Want your audience to be wowed at your next event? Feature an appearance and LIVE RECORDING of the Psych Central Podcast right from your stage! For more details, or to book an event, please email us at show@psychcentral.com. Previous episodes can be found at PsychCentral.com/Show or on your favorite podcast player. Psych Central is the internet’s oldest and largest independent mental health website run by mental health professionals. Overseen by Dr. John Grohol, Psych Central offers trusted resources and quizzes to help answer your questions about mental health, personality, psychotherapy, and more. Please visit us today at PsychCentral.com.  To learn more about our host, Gabe Howard, please visit his website at gabehoward.com. Thank you for listening and please share with your friends, family, and followers.

The post Podcast: Does Law Enforcement Need Mental Health Care? first appeared on World of Psychology.

from https://ift.tt/2EBFwM2 Check out https://daniejadkins.wordpress.com/

[brentrogers]

Podcast: Does Law Enforcement Need Mental Health Care?

Today’s show takes a good hard look at police culture as a whole. What type of personality is drawn to a career in law enforcement? What are officers taught in the academy? Why do they receive so little mental health care when they face so much trauma on the job? These are just a few of the areas that our guest, mental health advocate Gabriel Nathan, lays bare.

Join us as we discuss the basic foundations of law enforcement and how Gabriel believes the profession needs to evolve to keep up with the times.

We want to hear from you — Please fill out our listener survey by clicking the graphic above!

SUBSCRIBE & REVIEW

  Guest information for ‘Gabriel Nathan – Police MH’ Podcast Episode

Gabriel Nathan is an author, editor, actor, and a mental health and suicide awareness advocate. He is Editor in Chief of OC87 Recovery Diaries, an online publication that features stories of mental health, empowerment, and change. Recently, OC87 Recovery Diaries produced a unique film series called “Beneath the Vest: First Responder Mental Health” that features candid and moving recovery stories from firefighters, EMS personnel, law enforcement, dispatchers, and a crisis intervention specialist instructor. These films are being used by first responder agencies across the U. S. and by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. 

Independent of his work at OC87 Recovery Diaries, Gabe raises mental health awareness, generates conversations around suicide and its prevention, and spreads a message of hope with his 1963 Volkswagen Beetle, Herbie the Love Bug replica that bears the number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline on its rear window. Gabriel lives in a suburb of Philadelphia with his wife, twins, a Basset hound named Tennessee, a long-haired German Shepherd named Sadie, and his Herbie. You can view Gabriel’s TEDx Talk on his approach to suicide awareness here. Gabriel and Herbie teamed up to

produce a documentary film about their suicide awareness mission; you can view the entire film and learn more information about Gabriel, Herbie, and suicide awareness here. You can also follow Gabriel and Herbie on IG @lovebugtrumpshate. 

About The Psych Central Podcast Host

Gabe Howard is an award-winning writer and speaker who lives with bipolar disorder. He is the author of the popular book, Mental Illness is an Asshole and other Observations, available from Amazon; signed copies are also available directly from the author. To learn more about Gabe, please visit his website, gabehoward.com.

Computer Generated Transcript for ‘Gabriel Nathan – Police MH’ Episode

Editor’s Note: Please be mindful that this transcript has been computer generated and therefore may contain inaccuracies and grammar errors. Thank you.

Announcer: You’re listening to the Psych Central Podcast, where guest experts in the field of psychology and mental health share thought-provoking information using plain, everyday language. Here’s your host, Gabe Howard.

Gabe Howard: Hello, everyone, and welcome to this week’s episode of The Psych Central Podcast, I’m your host, Gabe Howard, and calling into the show today we have Gabriel Nathan. Gabriel is the executive director of OC87 Recovery Diaries, and they produced a film series called Beneath the Vest: First Responder Mental Health. And it features police officers, EMS personnel, dispatchers, fire service, all individuals talking about trauma and complex PTSD. Gabriel, welcome to the show.

Gabriel Nathan: Hi, and thanks for having me. It’s great to be here.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, today we’re going to be talking about law enforcement reform, and I know that you have a lot of thoughts on the subject.

Gabriel Nathan: First of all, before I really get into the weeds of the question, what I have found is whenever you are taking a position that is critical in any way of law enforcement or attempts to raise questions even about the way law enforcement agencies do anything, it is extremely important to establish your own bona fides. Because anybody who steps up to challenge law enforcement is immediately regarded with suspicion, paranoia, is dismissed as, quote, libtard, troll, anti-cop antifa, whatever. I’m none of those things. I am someone who, for the last 20 years has been an advocate for slain police officers and their families through editorials, commentaries in newspapers. I have attended over 10 police funerals in Philadelphia down to Maryland. I have done a lot of advocacy work for law enforcement in regard to mental health of first responders. I’m very well aware of the suicide rate for police officers. I am someone who knows law enforcement culture. I am someone who has a respect for police officers and what they do. And so I just want people to know that I am doing this from a place of love and concern and from a position of someone who believes ardently that there absolutely needs to be change and radical reimagining of law enforcement across the board.

Gabe Howard: Thank you, Gabriel, for saying all that, and I agree with many of your points, and I want to point out that you were a recent guest on another podcast that I have the pleasure of hosting, Not Crazy. And you had so much to say, well, it spilled over into a second podcast. I strongly encourage all of our listeners to head over to PsychCentral.com/NotCrazy and check out that interview. All right, Gabriel, to get started, you believe that in many ways we’re recruiting the wrong people and that a lot of our problems start early, even before police officers get into the academy.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, look at the people who go into law enforcement. OK, a lot of people decide they want to be cops when they’re children. They’re watching shows like Cops, they’re watching shows like

Law & Order. They’re watching Lethal Weapon movies. Even as far as Hill Street Blues. I would say that this problem started with Hill Street Blues, the opening credits of Hill Street Blues. I love the music. And then the garage door opens and the Plymouth Fury is in the garage with the red lights bursting out of the garage. It’s exciting, right? So who is drawn to that profession? Action junkies. It’s people who want that adrenaline rush. And then we put them in situations where they’re in a constant state of hyper arousal. They’re always looking around. They’re doing the head swivel. You know, is someone going to hurt me, is someone going to shoot me? In a twenty five year career, most police officers never fire their weapon, never fire their weapon once. Many, many police officers never pull their weapon. And yet that’s the kind of human being that is drawn to that profession. And I have had people tell me, well, we pull in people who are really resilient. Well, is that what you’re doing? Or are you pulling in people who are craving action and are not necessarily maybe the most empathic people? Because a law enforcement agency can’t function if a police officer responds to a call and then starts falling apart emotionally because they can’t process what they saw. So maybe law enforcement is either consciously or subconsciously trying to pull people in who maybe don’t have that kind of empathic response. That’s not who I want riding around in a patrol car with a firearm and the power of arrest.

Gabe Howard: People who are attracted to law enforcement are more often than not white men. Do you think targeting women and people of color to become police officers and diversifying the police force, would that help?

Gabriel Nathan: It’s a start, but there’s even problems with that. There are women in law enforcement and there are minorities in law enforcement. But what I hear about individuals who identify as female or who are minorities, it’s that they have to work twice as hard and be twice as aggressive on the street so that they can prove that they belong in that culture, that they can prove themselves to their FTO’s. That’s Field Training Officer, which, by the way, Derek Chauvin, who killed George Floyd, he was an FTO.

Gabe Howard: Oh, I did not realize that.

Gabriel Nathan: Yeah. To prove to their colleagues and the veterans on the force that they can be there and that black officers say that they are even tougher on black members of their community so they can show I’m really blue, I’m really with you. So there’s all of that kind of bulls**t that is going on in law enforcement culture, even when you’re bringing on minorities. Even when you have black commanders, there are still acts of racism, acts of racism perpetrated against officers, not just the public. Right. So this is still happening. Yes, law enforcement has a reputation of being traditionally a white, Catholic, boys’ club. That is changing, but it is still changing very slowly. Police departments are still not representative of the racial and ethnic makeup of most of their communities. We are still living in a situation where police officers in a lot of places can live outside of the community where they police. So you have law enforcement officers policing really impoverished areas, but they’re living in nicer suburbs. So they get to go home. They don’t really have an investment in their community. They don’t really know the ins and outs of their community. Over and over again, they see the criminal element of the community, but they don’t interact with the law abiding citizens. So I find that incredibly problematic.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, we’re hearing a lot about defund the police. Can you talk about what that means? Because I believe a lot of people believe this just means the police are going to go away and it’s going to be the Wild West.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s never like there is not someone available, right? And that’s what everyone who’s freaking out about all the stuff on the police thing and putting these absurd commercials where there’s a phone ringing, ringing, ringing incessantly. Yes, 911. What’s your emergency? We’re sorry. Due to all the liberals who want to defund the police, there’s no one here to respond to your. Horses**t. That’s not reality. And it’s not reality now, and it won’t be reality either if we radically reimagine law enforcement. Nobody out there in the Black Lives Matter movement or in any advocacy movement wants someone to get hurt because help is not available for them.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, I want to pivot really hard right now and talk about the mental health of the police officers. Society, we have been told, since the beginning, that policing is a dangerous job. It’s a job filled with worry and trauma and stress. So it would occur to me, or I would think, that mental health training for police officers to address their own mental health would start at the academy. Is this the case?

Gabriel Nathan: The majority of training at the academy, they’re focused on learning laws and municipal codes, they’re focused on going to the gun range. They’re doing EVOC, which is Emergency Vehicle Operator Course training. That’s really what it’s about. It’s about self-defense and watching your six and watching all these videos over and over and over again of police officers getting killed during traffic stops, really scaring the bejesus out of you. OK, that’s what academy training is like. They don’t really address at all the trauma that police officers are going to experience. They don’t address the issue of police suicide. They don’t address all of that stuff. And they also don’t really address deescalating situations. It’s all about control. How do you control a suspect? How do you take control of a situation? How do you take command of a scene? The police academy curriculum is very, very full. And we know in Germany it takes three years to become a police officer. In other places, it takes two years or a year and a half. My police academy curriculum, it was full time, and it was nine months. But nowhere in that nine months curriculum was there room for crisis intervention, de-escalation, signs and symptoms of mental illness, all that kind of stuff. That’s all taught later.

Gabe Howard: I just want to point out that every state is different, and in many municipalities it takes longer to become a hairstylist than it does to become a police officer.

Gabriel Nathan: Correct, yes.

Gabe Howard: You said at the academy level there’s not very much mental health training, is that because there’s so much more going on?

Gabriel Nathan: It’s that there’s so much going on, but I also think there is, there’s a problem. There’s a disconnect, I think, between the governing bodies who create these police academy curricula and the realities of what’s actually happening on the street. So much of police officers’ time is spent dealing with mental health calls and psychiatric emergencies. If police officers all over the nation are saying this is

what we are spending so much of our time doing, that’s changing. But the academy curriculum is staying the same. They are not recognizing that, wow, we really need to refocus and reshift the majority of what we’re spending our time teaching these officers. We need to be more responsive. Unfortunately, police culture, in my experience, like the military, like religion, and I really do look at policing as a religion. Policing has deep Catholic roots. It is one of those institutions that changes very, very slowly. Like in the Catholic Church, when you have priests that act malevolently, you hide them. Sometimes in police departments, in a large police department, you move a problem officer to a different precinct or to a different duty. It’s the same kind of thing. They’re both steeped in rituals. And so unfortunately, when you have a culture that is so closed and is so insular and is so paranoid about any attempts to change it, they’re going to be very, very resistant to evolution. And when you have a society that is evolving and that is changing, the police need to change with that. And they ain’t about doing that, and particularly the governing bodies that create academy curricula, that changes very, very, very slowly.

Gabe Howard: Now, when you say that the police culture has these traits, they’re very insular, they’re protected from outside criticism, why do you think that is?

Gabriel Nathan: So the first and again, I’m just going to say this is my personal opinion based on things that I know and I speak from my own experience and blah, blah, blah. OK, so that aside, here is why I believe that law enforcement is resistant to change and resistant to outside influences. This is a classic us versus them situation. Any time you criticize a police officer or any time you try to raise a question about things, the response is you don’t know what it’s like. You don’t know what it’s like to walk in my shoes. You don’t know what it’s like to be on a dark road at 3:00 a.m. behind a car with tinted windows and backup is 20 minutes. I’ve heard this a lot from cops and they’re right. I don’t know what that’s like and I can’t know what that’s like. Nobody can know what it’s like to be me either. We can have empathy and we can try to understand, but we don’t know what it’s like to be a police officer. OK, so that’s just a fact. That doesn’t mean that we have no right to question and that we have no right to say do we think this could be done differently or perhaps done better?

Gabriel Nathan: You hear about the blue wall all the time. So the blue wall is a very symbolic metaphor. It is really meant to close ranks and we protect our own. You’re not us and you don’t understand. It’s not really the police against the criminals. It’s the police against the civilians. Anybody who does not wear blue is the enemy because we don’t get it. That is why there is resistance to civilian review boards of line of duty shootings. That is why there is resistance to any politician who raises any issue. They’re anti blue. You’re against us. If you’re not in lockstep with the FOP and all of that stuff, you’re the enemy. And I have seen police officers turn against me. They don’t care about the twenty years of advocacy work that I’ve done. They don’t care about the mental health videos that I produced, the voice that I’ve given to law enforcement officers who are struggling. They don’t give a damn because the second you fall out of line, you’re history.

Gabe Howard: I’ve been really surprised to learn that the suicide rate among law enforcement officers is just scary high. I recently had the opportunity to emcee an event that had a police captain. He’s been a police officer for over 25 years, and he does these trainings talking about how we provide zero mental health care for police officers. And one of the things that he points out is that we’re constantly training

them how to be in a high level shootout, like a war zone in their own city, that the majority of police officers will never be in. A majority of police officers never even pull their guns. But we spend so much time training them for that. But the reality is pretty much every police officer will at some point have to inform somebody that their loved one has died. They respond to traffic accidents and, well, accidents in general all the time. They have seen passed away people in the wild. And we give them nothing for that. There’s no mental health follow up. We don’t ask them if they’re OK. When they go home at the end of the day, after seeing a dead child who died in a car accident, they look at their own children. They look at their own families. They look at their own spouses. One of your big advocacy points is getting mental health care for law enforcement. Do you believe that police officers are starting to be more receptive to the idea that they themselves need mental health care?

Gabriel Nathan: That I believe we are making progress in, and I feel like there is an older generation of law enforcement officers who just need to retire so we can have more evolved and emotionally aware people take over. This older generation of police officers is the suck it up, buttercup. Be a man. You’re fine. We all have to see this s**t. This is part of the job. Whatever. There is a newer generation of more emotionally intelligent police officers coming up through the ranks who have a better understanding of, oh, my God, like, yes, we do have to see this kind of stuff, but we also have to deal with it. We also have to emotionally process it. We don’t just swallow it and then go to the bar and drink with our buddies and try to wash it all away with alcohol so we can get up and do it the next morning. We need to be able to talk about this stuff. And there are crisis intervention, stress management teams and there are trauma debriefings. And I’m not trying to criticize what you just said, but it’s not just dead children. They see all kinds of stuff that is unimaginable.

Gabriel Nathan: And yes, nobody tells them about how that’s going to impact them. Nobody tells them, hey, by the way, did you know that simply by having constant access to lethal means on your hip twenty four hours a day that you are at extreme risk for taking your own life? Nobody talks about that kind of stuff. When I hear people say cops are there to protect and serve, I laugh because they can’t even protect themselves. They’re not even given the tools to help themselves. Yet we live in this fantasy world where they’re here to help and protect us. They’re all falling apart and where are the resources to help them? And so that really burns me when we have these hiring practices that are ineffective and then they’re not given the tools to emotionally cope with the things that they see. We know that there’s rampant alcoholism and drug use. We know that they kill themselves more than they are killed or die in accidents in the last three years that there are stats. So we know all these things. And yet we live in this fantasy world where, hey, we’re fine. Don’t you criticize us. Don’t you come at us. Your whole profession is rife with problems, really systemic issues.

Gabe Howard: We’ll be right back after we hear from our sponsors.

Sponsor Message: This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp.com. Secure, convenient, and affordable online counseling. Our counselors are licensed, accredited professionals. Anything you share is confidential. Schedule secure video or phone sessions, plus chat and text with your therapist whenever you feel it’s needed. A month of online therapy often costs less than a single traditional face to face session. Go to BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral and experience seven days of free therapy to see if online counseling is right for you. BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral.

Gabe Howard: And we’re back talking about police officers and mental health with Gabriel Nathan. I don’t think that the general public is aware that more police officers die by suicide every year than by a criminal act. And our culture is very pro law enforcement. We want to help law enforcement. We want to keep law enforcement safe. This really leads me to my question of, as a society, are we doing enough to protect police officers from suicide? Is the police force doing enough to protect their law enforcement officers from suicide? Because I don’t think the general public is aware that police officers are in harm’s way. They’re not protecting themselves from this.

Gabriel Nathan: Right, well, I believe there are pockets of change in that area. My friend and colleague Michelle Monzo, who works at MCES, is one of those change agents in terms of educating law enforcement officers, not just about de-escalation and crisis intervention, but about their own mental health and how their own mental health is going to be impacted by the things that they see and do and encouraging them to seek help. Sunny Provetto in Vermont, he’s a change agent there. There are little pockets of things that are happening that are good, but systemically, in terms of the law enforcement culture, no. That change is not happening. And I think it is a huge black eye for police culture that organizationally from day one in the academy or even pre day one, when we get in terms of screening and who is applying to be police officers, these changes are not happening. And it’s inexcusable, really.

Gabe Howard: You know, Gabriel, you talk about action junkies a lot, and I do understand what you’re saying, and I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, and I just keep thinking about the fire department. Aren’t they action junkies as well? We have movies like Backdraft and we have a TV show, Chicago Fire. And it’s sort of pop culture versioned as well. So does the fire department have these same problems when it comes to firefighters’ mental health? They’re responding to emergency calls. They see people lose their homes and their lives. They have to deal with death. Is there anything that we can learn from the way the fire department is handling it or aren’t they doing a good job either?

Gabriel Nathan: Well, for sure, so they’re the first responder culture that I talk about. I feel like it encompasses police officers, firefighters, emergency medical technicians, paramedics. So, yeah, all of the people in those cultures share a lot of common draws to their profession. And they also share a lot of common elements when it comes to their own mental health and also a lot of common stigmas related to mental health. There’s a lot of that you know, oh, you’re wussy, you’re blah blah blah. That kind of stuff in those cultures, too. And that is changing slowly. But that is still a part of that culture. And we are also losing more firefighters to suicide than we’re losing in line of duty fires. So that situation is happening. Absolutely. The difference is that firefighters don’t have a gun on their hip. They don’t have that constant access to lethal means. So they don’t have the means to take their own lives. You don’t hear about firefighters taking their own lives in their fire truck, but you do hear about police officers taking their own lives in their radio cars, parked outside of the squad house. But, yes, there is the same problem with firefighters and other first responders having trouble processing things that they see and things that they experience and also having relationship issues.

Gabriel Nathan: A lot of suicide. It’s not just about quote the things we see. And I think that’s a stereotype about first responder culture. A lot of it has to do with relationship problems and that also gets to the us versus them thing when a first responder has a civilian spouse. And this is why a lot of first responders are drawn to first responders as romantic partners. The civilian spouse, you don’t get me. You don’t understand. You don’t know what I see. You don’t know what it’s like. Well, but the first responders is also partly responsible for that problem because they don’t talk about it and they think they’re protecting their spouse by not talking about all the things that they see and experience when really what they’re doing is they’re purposefully widening that gulf between themselves and their romantic partner by not sharing, by not opening up. Right. So that problem is endemic, I think, to all manner of first responders, not just police.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, during the research for this show, I looked up the number of police officers who were killed in the line of duty, and I just assumes that all of them had died during the commission of a felonious act. I literally conjured up this idea of a shootout, but I was surprised to learn that there was a decent percentage of people who had died in a car accident.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, yes.

Gabe Howard: And it was higher. The number of police officers who died in a car accident versus the commission of a violent crime was higher.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, that’s exactly right. So there’s a couple of reasons for that. First of all, what are police officers doing all day long? They’re riding around in their radio cars. So the more you’re doing that, the more likely you are to be killed in a car accident. Now, who’s making patrol cars? American car manufacturers. OK, the Chevy Caprice, which was the favorite vehicle of law enforcement agencies from the late 70s, all the way through the mid 90s. The Ford Crown Victoria, which was a mainstay in police departments from the 80s all the way through, I think they stopped making the police package Crown Vic in like 2018. These were very unsafe vehicles. The last generation Crown Victoria had a design flaw where if it was hit from behind, the fuel tank would ignite.

Gabe Howard: Wow, really?

Gabriel Nathan: And Ford created this special fire suppression system embedded in the trunk to deal with this issue, and law enforcement agencies had to change the way they conduct traffic stops to position the police vehicle. They changed the way traffic stops were done to prevent police cars from being hit by behind when they were stopping vehicles on the side of the road. Because police officers were being killed in car accidents where they were rear ended in their Crown Vics and they would explode.

Gabe Howard: Oh, that’s terrible.

Gabriel Nathan: So there are much, much safer cars out there. But who’s getting bids by police departments? It’s Ford and General Motors and they’re making, frankly, s***y cars. The Chevrolet Caprice in the early 90s had door mounted safety belts. The shoulder belt was mounted on the door of

the car, not on the door sill. So police cars would crash, the door would open and the seatbelt was not restraining the officers. The officer would fly out or in some cases be decapitated by the seatbelt. So, again, you’re having these s****y cars designed for law enforcement when they’re not safe.

Gabe Howard: That’s unacceptable.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s just another example of police departments not taking the lives of their own officers seriously. We’ll just buy whatever s****y car is cheapest to buy. Whatever Michigan State Police, who conducts the test for police cars, whatever they tell us to buy. There are so many problems in law enforcement culture down to what they drive in and all the way on up.

Gabe Howard: When the general public hears killed in the line of duty, they think, shoot out, they don’t think car accident. And I was also surprised to learn about the majority of police officers who were killed in car accidents who were not wearing seatbelts.

Gabriel Nathan: Yes, yes.

Gabe Howard: It seems preventable, just wear a seatbelt. I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that law enforcement isn’t taking care of their mental health if they’re not even wearing seatbelts. Seatbelts are well understood to save lives, and mental health is a more nebulous concept.

Gabriel Nathan: Yeah, it’s again, it’s the stereotypical macho culture. You know, my dad, who is an Israeli army veteran, he fought in two wars. He’s a very macho guy. I had to sit in the backseat of his car and cry until he would put his seatbelt on because he thought it wasn’t macho. Well, now, well, Gabriel, what do I need a seatbelt for? What’s going to happen to me? Right. That same culture that just needs to kind of go away.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, this has been an incredible discussion. Thank you so much for hanging with me and thank you for coming over from the Not Crazy podcast. Which, by the way, everybody can check out more from Gabriel Nathan at PsychCentral.com/NotCrazy. Or just look up Not Crazy on your favorite podcast player. Gabriel, tell us about OC87 Recovery Diaries.

Gabriel Nathan: Sure. So I’m the editor in chief of OC87 Recovery Diaries, it’s a nonprofit mental health publication. We tell stories of mental health, empowerment and change in two ways. First person mental health recovery essays. We publish a brand new personal essay every single week. And we also produce short subject, professionally made documentary films all about people living with mental health challenges. You can see all of our mental health films and read all of our mental health essays at OC87RecoveryDiaries.org. And if you want to follow me, really the only place to do that is on Instagram. I’m at Lovebug Trumps Hate and I would love to, I’d love to be your friend.

Gabe Howard: Lovebug Trumps Hate is all about Gabriel driving around in his Herbie replica. It’s a love bug replica. The pictures are incredible and the suicide prevention that Gabriel does, is incredible. Look, I just love Herbie, but also check out the OC87 Recovery Diaries website, because there is where you can find Beneath the Vest. That entire series is on there completely free. And Gabriel’s not actually in it. It’s all about actual first responders.

Gabriel Nathan: Correct, I’m not in it at all. It’s police officers, a dispatcher, firefighters, EMS personnel and my friend Michelle Monzo, who is the crisis intervention specialist trainer at MCES.

Gabe Howard: Gabriel, thank you. Thank you once again.

Gabriel Nathan: It’s a privilege. Thank you for having me on.

Gabe Howard: And thank you, listeners. Remember, you can get one week of free, convenient, affordable, private online counseling any time anywhere simply by visiting BetterHelp.com/PsychCentral. We’ll see everyone next week.

Announcer: You’ve been listening to The Psych Central Podcast. Want your audience to be wowed at your next event? Feature an appearance and LIVE RECORDING of the Psych Central Podcast right from your stage! For more details, or to book an event, please email us at show@psychcentral.com. Previous episodes can be found at PsychCentral.com/Show or on your favorite podcast player. Psych Central is the internet’s oldest and largest independent mental health website run by mental health professionals. Overseen by Dr. John Grohol, Psych Central offers trusted resources and quizzes to help answer your questions about mental health, personality, psychotherapy, and more. Please visit us today at PsychCentral.com.  To learn more about our host, Gabe Howard, please visit his website at gabehoward.com. Thank you for listening and please share with your friends, family, and followers.

The post Podcast: Does Law Enforcement Need Mental Health Care? first appeared on World of Psychology.

Podcast: Does Law Enforcement Need Mental Health Care? syndicated from

[tipsycad147]

Alexis J. Cunningfolk

It’s been a time of tense muscles, street noise, and fight-back racket against the inhumane and unjust demagogues who’ve taken over the White House. I’ve been finding myself run ragged not just from work but from the constant little siren that’s been going off in my head saying “This is not normal. This is not ok. You and your loved ones are in danger.” I know that a lot of folks in my community are feeling the same and, of course, those feelings are valid. But as my wise friend Maria says, “The world is on fire but you still need to eat lunch.”

(Do yourself a favour and click on that link for a “go the f*ck to sleep” style poem on why you need to eat lunch even when things are rough. I’ll wait, don’t worry.)

Last week, I wrote about the necessity of self-care not just as an invitation to all of you to love on yourself, but a reminder to myself. Since then, I’ve been taking better stock of what it is I need to be doing to take care of myself so that I might continue to fight the good fight and care for my community for the long haul (because, praise Goddess, Witches will always outlive their oppressors if we protect our magick).

When I'm feeling out of sorts, my self-care reassessment includes the following:

Acknowledge you're probably running on some false narratives.

Case in point - if I take 30 minutes to stretch and meditate I will let down the entire radical movement attempting to overthrow the patriarchy. Guess what? That’s just not true.

Ask yourself if there is another option.

We need to release those false narratives but then we need to fill that space with a new story. If I take 30 minutes to stretch and meditate I will be revitalised and better able to do the work that I want to do (which in the long run means the patriarchy is still coming down).

Slow down.

General life advice, right? It is not just about slowing down physically, but mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. An example of switching over to slow would be moving from scrolling through your social media feed nonstop to sitting down and reading a book. Or instead of searching for the "right" crystal that'll make your fear go away, simply sitting and connecting with the crystal core of heart of the earth.

Drink water and eat good food.

Let’s continue to fight to protect our sacred water and keep hydrated. Let’s continue to fight to protect our right to healthy food by eating food which makes us feel good. Rather than a “don’t eat that” restriction, imagine how much clearer your investment in protecting water and food would feel like if you had a better relationship with both in your daily life.

Self-care and healing and attention to the body and the spiritual dimension - all of this is now a part of radical social justice struggles. - Angela Davis -

My rejection of false narratives, reaffirmation of more kind ones, slowing down, and commitment to drink water and eat good food all led me to thinking, “Wait, why haven’t I been drinking that tea I love so much?”

That tea which I love so much is Bliss Blend. While I’ll drink it day or night, it is one of my favourite teas for bringing in a feeling of ease in the evenings. Bliss Blend was one of the very first teas I sold in my shop (and by shop I mean on the cold autumn streets of Portland, ME during the last of the farmer’s market season as well as online) and I’ve been using it in my personal and professional practice ever since. Since I often work in the evenings, I like a tea that is relaxing but won’t make me overly drowsy. While Bliss Blend is useful as a pre-bedtime tea, it’s not meant to be a super-sleepy sort of brew. I originally created it on the fly when a friend came over and started to have an anxiety attack, so if your stress manifests as anxiety, Bliss Blend might be a great brew for you.

Bliss Blend features three herbs (two of which are on my indispensable herbs list) and a mellow flavor. We'll take a quick look at each herb individually and then I’ll share with you my Bliss Blend recipe. I've also made suggestions for how to replace an herb with another if you don't have the following three on hand.

Lavender (Lavandula officinalis) is a fantastic nervine. Actually, all three herbs in my Bliss Blend are nervines of different varieties. Lavender has a lovely softening energy (it might be a good herbal mascot for the radical softness movement actually) and acts like a gentle massage to the nervous system. It’s really useful for headaches brought on by nervous tension and has the added bonus of protecting the body from infection (which we’re more prone to be impacted by if we’re stressed out). If you’re looking for a Lavender alternative I would recommend a cooling nervine.

Skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora) is another nervine but of the definitively relaxing variety (one of its common names is Blisswort so you know it’s good stuff!). Skullcap helps relieve feelings of being overwhelmed and quiet the nonstop anxious chatter that can go on in our heads. The herb actually produces more endorphins in the body because its a rich source of scutellarin. Skullcap is one of my favourite herbs to help relieve muscular tension (hello, tight shoulders!) and, as the name, implies, helps with those tension headaches. If you’re looking for a Skullcap alternative I would recommend a relaxing nervine.

My final herb is Sacred Basil (Ocimum sanctum or tenuiflorum) and its another nervine, but of a more warming and stimulating variety. I run cold, so when I have two cooling herbs like Lavender and Skullcap in a blend, I like to warm it up a bit with a herb like Sacred Basil so that I do not overly cool my system. Now, don’t get concerned seeing that I have an herb labelled as stimulating as part of my brew. First of all, Sacred Basil is mildly stimulating, and second, it’s an adaptogenic herb which has the amazing ability to energise or relax body systems as needed. If you’re looking for a Sacred Basil replacement seek a warming and gently stimulating nervine.

Bliss Blend

2 parts Lavender (Lavandula officinalis)

2 parts Sacred Basil (Ocimum sanctum or tenuiflorum)

1 part Skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora)

Brew 1 teaspoon of herb per 8 ounces of water and steep for 5 - 15 minutes. For a medicinal strength brew, use 1 tablespoon per 8 ounces of water and steep for 30 minutes to overnight. I like adding in just a touch of honey, but it is equally delicious without any sweetness added. Now, if drinking herbs are not your cup of tea (ha! funny!) you can always make Bliss Blend into a healing foot bath.

So now you know what I’m drinking tonight. If you haven’t already, check out my post on why self-care is a necessary and revolutionary act. Then unplug, make yourself some tea, untangle some tension, and practice softness and ease.

http://www.wortsandcunning.com/blog?offset=1488027600172