Struggling With Fat

I’m fat.  It does not make me less of a person, as with anyone like me but there you are.  I work out often and can do various active and demanding things.  However, I’m fat.  I’m seeking a way to be less so.  However, it would not serve my purpose to deny the truth or otherwise, try to explain it in another way.  There has been a recent discussion on the notion of being fat and even a new concept – fat-shaming.  It is an interesting look at a culture trying to address something but trying to do so without specifically naming the problem or the condition.

I’ve hired a trainer and have recently tried to make a more serious effort to lose weight.  My problem is two-fold – I eat horribly unhealthy and delicious food and I don’t work out enough.  The problem clearly lies with me.  I was once healthy and in shape but that was some time ago.  So, I seek a way to drop the pounds for health and family reasons.  In short, I’d like to be with my family well into the future and at present, I’m one steak dinner away from a full coronary.  I have no excuse and there is little that anyone can say to tell me otherwise.  However, in the last year or so, there has been a growing furor over the nature of being fat and what to do about it.   

Were you aware there are a group of people who are trying to convince fat people that it is ok to be so?  They have attacked others for actions they call fat-shaming.  Most of what I’ve seen as examples of fat-shaming seems more about the perpetrator being a jerk.  What that has led to is a movement to have people proudly love and accept their size.  Even the word “fat” is starting to take on the connotation of other words directed at people for their race or ethnicity.  What is being accomplished here?  Are people mean?  Sure and for many other reasons in addition to seeing someone who is fat.  Are people well-intentionally ignorant?  Yes and particularly when confronted with something that is hurting someone they love.  So, if you take away the jerks and the well-meaning friends or family, what are we talking about?   

We need an honest and frank discussion about size in this country, without the hyperbole.  Calls for healthier living and weight levels are not calls for anorexia or bulimia or any other chase for unhealthy weight standards.  These aforementioned activists have even attacked those who are making general calls for healthier living, such as Maria Kang – the mother of three who seeks to encourage others to get in shape.  First Lady Michelle Obama said that her push for healthier lunch items in school is not about weight but about feeling better and healthier.  Sure but if we cannot even say the condition for fear of hurting feelings, we are not addressing the issues.   

When Amy Chua – Tiger Mom extraordinaire – called her daughter fat and lazy, I can’t imagine that young lady ending up in therapy wondering about how others see her and whether they respect her.  She was told upfront and there was never a doubt about it.  Compare that to the teen who has been told, “No, you are not fat.  You are beautiful and wonderful and people who don’t see that are not worth your time.”  Deep down, however, the teen knows they are fat but they are surrounded by people who won’t say it.  Is there any wonder that emotional issues develop?   

Part of the reaction by these activists is defensiveness.  Some of the reaction is from well-meaning people who worry about others being hurt.  However, you cannot fix a problem without first addressing it.  I know some will find my attitude callous or unsympathetic.  However, it is coming from one who is dealing with the same thing.  I’m worse than some and not nearly as bad as others.  Yet, the challenge is the same even if the scale is not.  Shakespeare said that a rose is still a rose no matter what you call it.  So it is with the concept of being fat.  It does not help to run from a name.

Spring Break Hiatus

Greetings everyone.  I'm on Spring Break and driving through the desert.  Not much internet interfacing but this is just a short little message to tell you that this weekend's posting is going to be great.  Much better than this one.  So, join me in a little rest and relaxation.  Kick your feet up, tell your boss you'll be back next week and do something fun. 

See you next week.

Ross

The Reign of the Heckler's Veto

Some years ago, historian Richard Pells wrote a book entitled Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated and Transformed American Culture Since World War II.  In it, Mr. Pells suggested that while many say, certainly in Europe, that the United States has had a disproportionate influence on the Old World, the facts suggest the opposite.  Over the last couple of decades, European jurists have protected the angry responders to provocative speech or action.  In American legal jargon, it is known as the Heckler’s Veto.  Instead of affirming the right to speech or thought, we side with those that are offended, sometimes to ridiculous lengths.  The examples from Europe have been headshaking but Americans have always felt they could smugly believe that it is not the way here.  According to the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this past week, that has changed.   

A couple of years ago, in a California high school, a group of Mexican-American students decided to make a public display over Cinco de Mayo.  In doing so, they hoisted a flag onto a tree in front of the school and celebrated underneath.  In a childish tit for tat, a couple of non-Hispanic students decided this would be a good day to wear shirts with American flags on it – in response to the festivities in front of the school.  Then, the Cinco de Mayo celebrants had an issue with this and threats were levied against the non-Hispanic students – in this case it was physical violence threatened.  The administration, fearing that a disturbance could quickly ensue and escalate, told the non-Hispanic students they had to take the shirts off or turn them inside-out.  Otherwise, they would be forced to leave the school.  Thus was struck the first blow on behalf of the Heckler’s Veto – the restriction of one person’s speech because of the potential disturbances caused by others. 

The parents of the American-flag wearing students sued and the case went before the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals.  Typically, the 9^th Court is known for a rather liberal take on the Constitution.  Being based in California and covering territory that includes the Pacific Northwest, its ideological foundations are certainly in line with a segment of that region.  However, it seems their most recent ruling is more illogical than most.  The 9^th Court ruled that, in accordance to precedent set by the Supreme Court and other lower courts, schools have the right to do what is necessary to preserve order and the learning environment.   

Typically, this type of latitude by school administrators have been directed towards mandatory drug tests as seen in Board of Education v. Earls (2002) as well as searching student property (lockers) as seen in New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985).  In 1988, the Court did decide in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier that newspaper stories about pregnant teens within the school (as well as sexual content) and students complaining about their parents were within the school’s purview to restrict.  However, one would have to surmise that the wearing of American flag emblazoned clothing hardly falls within the category of traditionally offensive or inappropriate material. 

Still, the jurists of the 9^th District have put a very strange twist on the traditional protection of speech, even in a traditionally restricted area like schools.  There is no Constitutional provision that says that speech can only be free if it does not offend.  Indeed, that is the most important speech to defend.  Presumably, this could go before the Supreme Court and hopefully, cooler and more measured judicial heads will prevail.  It clearly has not in California.  Europe has its own issues with this topic has they have, in some sectors, given up the fight and the importance of free speech and expression.  Should we give up ground on this issue, we will spend our last years on earth, in the words of Ronald Reagan, “telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

An Eastern Dilemma

Recently and outside the attention of most American newscasts, an uprising has occurred and, apparently, succeeded in the Ukraine.  At the center of the debate has been an argument about the future direction of the country – either towards Europe or Russia.  The recently deposed and now missing president, Viktor Yanukovych, bent towards the money and support from Moscow while dismissing the demands of the people who largely looked to the economic prosperity and political freedom of the West.  The state of the Ukraine today is of prime importance to the future of Russian hegemony, EU expansion and American relevance.   

In 2010, Mr. Yanukovych defeated Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, who rejected the election results and would soon be arrested and jailed for her protests against a “rigged” outcome.  There were voices from the West who objected to the arrest of Prime Minister Tymoshenko but nothing changed.  Fast forward to November of 2013 and while an ailing Ms. Tymoshenko labored in jail, President Yanukovych announced his intent to back away from trade with the EU and instead move closer to Vladimir Putin’s Russia.  This marked the beginning of the protests that dominated downtown Kiev, the country’s capital, with crowds not seen since the Orange Revolution of 2004.  

Relationship between the Russian-oriented government and the European-oriented population grew worse when Mr. Putin extended a monetary lifeline.  In January, the presence of protestors in Maiden Square in Kiev grew as the parliament passed anti-protest laws.  In the last couple of weeks, events have taken a draconian level as government snipers took aim at defenseless protestors as part of an outburst of violence that lasted several days and led to the death of nearly 80 and the wounding of hundreds more.  In the last few days, this strange story has grown more so, if that is possible.  A compromise deal was struck on 21 February that would include, among other things, new elections but by the following day, Mr. Yanukovych disappeared and Ms. Tymoshenko was released from jail. 

The Ukraine is an interesting country.  The population is a divided one with western side of the country more European while the eastern part still speaking Russian and more in tuned with Moscow than Brussels.  However, the last couple of months have shown the brutality and heavy-handedness of President Yanukovych and even his most ardent supporters have withdrawn.  This does not mean that the cause of the Kiev protestors is widely embraced.  Indeed, people in the east are more likely to see this as a type of coup d’état.  Yet, the country still has a fugitive president and a people looking for some type of respite in the immediate aftermath.  

As of now, the intentions of Mr. Putin are the most scrutinized.  His desires to create a neo-Soviet Union seem to be a concern for many.  Meanwhile, there are those who are pressuring the various capitals of the West to take a more active role in supporting the protesting Ukrainians.  For President Obama, he needs to be the voice for freedom and liberty – in doing so, he needs to echo the core values of the American people and throw his support behind the protestors.  The Ukrainian government has chosen an interim president – Oleksandr Turchynov – who is also a close political ally of Ms. Tymoshenko and the president has urged for national unity.  On the horizon is the strong presidential candidacy of former boxing champion Vitali Klitschko, who is an avid supporter of a pro-Europe movement. 

It is difficult to say how the Ukraine will solve its issues.  Such issues are plentiful and there are many voices seeking a redress of past and perceived slights and oppression.  The Ukraine has a potentially prosperous and viable future.  However, that will not happen until the new crisis is averted and Mr. Putin is politely but firmly kept at arm’s length.  It would not serve the Ukraine to act petulant toward its former communist overseers but the country’s salvation rests in its ability to take control of internal affairs.  If it can do this, it would certainly serve as a harbinger of good things to come for the Ukrainians.       

The Original Evil Empire

Watching the Olympics as I have over the last week, one could be forgiven for not knowing the nature of the Soviet Union.  As Jonah Goldberg recently wrote for the National Review, the sins of the Russian past are casually dismissed by the network and writers covering the Games.  Yet, Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union the evil empire for a reason.  One does not acquire a moniker of “evil” unless it is truly earned.  From the oppression of the masses to the persecution of the dissidents to the slaughter of the innocents, the Russia that exists today has distanced from the past but the Soviet Union of old can still be seen in the rear view mirror. 

From a czar to a premier, Russian history has been a story of one dictatorial ruler after another.  Vladimir Lenin was the first leader in the aftermath of the revolution and the defeat of the anti-Communist White Russians.  As leader of the Soviet Union, he spent most of his early years crushing any dissent within his party while taking measures to ensure the longevity of his new government.  So horrible were his policies against those he originally led, he faced an assassination attempt and wide spread discontent from all over the country.  However, as ruthlessly pragmatic as Lenin was, he could not compare to the man who would follow after his in 1924 – Josef Stalin. 

A man of humble beginnings, Josef Stalin proved his cruelty by eliminating those who sought to lead the country after Lenin’s death, including most famously Leon Trotsky.  He wiped out the peasant farming class, who hoped to make profits from their efforts.  Afterwards, he introduced the shockingly destructive economic policy of the Five Year Plan which collectivized Russian farms, forced millions into horrible factory conditions and destroyed any semblance of religious authority or devotion.  Stalin was fearful of the Russian Orthodox Church’s hold on the population.  Simultaneously, he established a secret police force to spy on the populace and purposefully created wide-spread starvation.  His special gulags for political prisoners were infamous for its brutality and conditions.  It is widely estimated by historians that Stalin represents one of the greatest mass murderers of his century – though that might be too limiting a characterization.  Numbers of those who died by his policies range from the millions to the tens of millions.  

Throughout the history of the Soviet Union, its leadership created a society that dwarfed the worst imaginations of George Orwell.  Soviet society was one based on fear and suspicion.  Depravation and drudgery defined lives spent in factories and in lines for disappearing supplies.  So complete was the hold the government had, when Mikhail Gorbachev sought to loosen the binds that tied the Russians into intellectual paralysis, many did not trust it.  So paranoid of the government’s intention were the Russians, they simply could not believe the change.  Literature and art, music and style were regimented and society was browbeaten into conformity.  Soviet society was so damaged, it was constant fodder for Hollywood films and historical studies.   

All of this said, the Russians have something for which they can be justly proud – themselves.  Seldom in human history has a people endured and ultimately thrived after such oppression.  The fact that Russian culture remains at all is a minor miracle.  While it has traditionally been characterized as backward and primitive, it has nevertheless achieved great things in spite of the barriers and limitations placed before them.  And as for those obstacles, they represent one of the worst, most dangerous, deadliest governments ever conceived.  Despite the attempts at whitewashing Russian history, its crimes are incontrovertible.  Facts do have a nasty way of getting in the way of revisionism.   

The Olympics Are Here! The Olympics Are Here!

A year before I began this blog, I had the experience of a lifetime when I attended the Winter Olympics in Vancouver.  Few moments in my life have included so many of the things I love the most – a combination of sport, spectacle, travel, history and geography.  With Vancouver so fresh in my mind, even four years later, I’ve been anticipating the games in Sochi.  With that, I have my memories of the trip but some thoughts as the 23^rd Winter Olympic Games begin in Russia.

Being in Vancouver in 2010 was like being in a walking Benetton commercial as I saw and interacted with people from all over the world.  I spoke to people from countries I had no experience with such as Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus.  Because it is the Olympics, every person seemed to revel in the colors of their country.  The orange-clad Dutch, the red soaked Swiss, the red, white and blue of the Brits and the Russians and the white and blue of the Finns and Koreans.  My wife spoke with various people in French and I tried communicating with people in German.  With everyone I met, I asked question after question about their lives and their countries.  It seems a bit dorky but this is not an opportunity one gets every day. 

I loved the sports – particularly, those sports not prevalent in the United States.  We had tickets to see the American women’s curling team, the U.S. men’s hockey team and the ski jump.  Here are where the colors are at their brightest and most fervent.  Given that I’m a patriotic individual, I really love to see expressions of patriotism in other people.  One can hear chants, songs and cries of devotion.  Over the next couple of weeks, I will be doing as I did four years earlier – checking out sports like the luge, figure skating (my wife’s influence) and cross-country skiing.  I will see the stands or the routes dotted with brilliant colors worn by people shouting their loudest for their fellow countrymen.  In particular, it will be fun to see the Russians cheer on their own in one sport after another. 

Now, as much as I love the Olympics, there are a couple of observations and thoughts that I have going into the games in Sochi.  First of all, there is likely no other country that has had the string of bad opening ceremony uniforms like the Americans.  The American contingent, time after time, have been guilty of over thinking what the uniform should be.  From berets to sweaters that should be a part of an ugly sweater party, our society lacks the understanding that sometimes, more is just more.  When one compares the American gilding to the simplicity of the Greeks, the Turks or the Spanish, the U.S. stands alone in garishness.  Of course, we were not the only ones as equally guilty of overthinking were the rainbow Germans and Pollock-like coats of the Liechtenstein athletes.  I know the Germans were likely making a statement but can you do it with more fashion sense?

My last thought is that there needs to be some tightening up of who can and cannot represent one country or another.  This was most evident in 2004 when the Greeks, as hosts requiring to field all matter of teams, recruited people from all over the world with even the scantest of genetic connections.  Third and fourth generation athletes with no knowledge of the home language are really stretching the definition of who is actually competing.  There are the American figure skating siblings, Chris and Cathy Reed, skating for Japan,  Singapore-born and British-raised Vanessa-Mae Vanakorn Nicholson skiing for Thailand, and German Prince Hubertus von Hohenlohe who will be taking to the slalom course for Mexico.  Now, to various degrees, these people do have connections but some are so thin, it is a wonder they can be seen in the snow of Sochi.   

Still, for all of the cattiness of some of my comments, this is my favorite time of the year.  Granted, the Olympics have never been the bastion of apolitical, peaceful coexistence that it champions itself to be.  However, they always try and the idea that people think there is a place for such an attempt makes me think we are not has far-gone as others fear.  My one final, parting wish is that there is no 2014 version of the pouty, petulant Mckayla Maroney – particularly representing the U.S.  The original was bad enough.

Farewell to a Good Man

I feel that my whole life is a contribution.
            Pete Seeger

From the moment I was exposed to political philosophy, I embraced a conservative paradigm.  From the moment I was first enraptured by music, my tastes gravitated toward the melodies that filled my home.  Over the years, more than a few people have made comments that my political leanings are at odds with the music that makes me happy.  I don’t apologize for this because, like most thinking at its best, who and what I am is not black and white or easily definable.  My opinions are not to be labeled by anyone.  It is for this reason that, this past week, I was sad and pained at the passing of legendary singer and activist Pete Seeger.     

My mother weaned me on country music and while it did not take, I found the stories and the history of the older songs compelling.  Mr. Seeger was equally compelling in his stories of the downtrodden and the forgotten ones.  He sang songs about and to those who existed on the outskirts of this country’s blessings.  In doing so, he provided a voice for those who previously had none.  His songs brought their plight to listeners who had no first-hand experience.  As a part of my political and musical education, I came to understand what it meant to exist in poor, rural regions or suffer the cruel hand of oppression. Songs like “We Shall Overcome”, “Waist Deep in the Big Muddy” and his many renditions of traditional American music have highlighted the plight of those subject to forces beyond their control.  

Beyond the music that highlighted the troubles of many Americans, Pete Seeger displayed a courage seldom seen in our more modern activists.  He joined those who were being hunted down and killed simply for being black or transient.  He sang for them, in front of them.  He was not content to simply allow his words to pour into microphones and emanate from studios and vinyl.  Mr. Seeger traveled the country and listened to the troubles of others.  He sat with the black man, the migrant farm worker, the Native American and the Vietnam veteran.  He listened to what they had to say and in return, he gave them kindness, a sympathetic ear and his time.  His personal courage allowed him to see what was truly happening in this country and craft tunes that changed generations.  

For Pete Seeger, a champion of folk music though he bristled at the moniker, he felt his music was for everyone and much of his career was spent in tiny halls, living rooms and children summer camps.  His love of singing was matched by his desire for others to sing with him and his time performing for and with children consisted of his greatest moments.  “If you sing for children, you can’t really say there’s no hope.”  According to PBS’s American Masters, he said that some of his songs were deemed innocuous enough but masterpieces like “This Land is Your Land” and others carried its own message and became standards in the process.   

If there is a part of his life and his message that struck the greatest discordant note with my beliefs, it was his stance on war and communism.  I’m not a pacifist and I don’t hold with communism.  To that end, some of his Vietnam songs and his visit to North Vietnam as well as his dalliances with communism in the 1940s struck me more naïveté – a child-like perception of how the world works.  He described leaving the communist party based on revelations about Josef Stalin but attributed benevolent intentions on the part of the North Vietnamese.  This though their rule was marked by re-education camps, torture and murder.  While utopic, I still marvel at his dedication and willingness to throw himself into the fire.  Seldom do people have the courage of their convictions and Pete Seeger was one and worthy of admiration.  

I love listening to his voice.  His rendition of “Guantanamera” and his original “Turn, Turn, Turn” fill me with emotion.  He was part of an education that included the works of Arlo Guthrie, Johnny Cash, the Kingston Trio and the Chieftains.  The story of ordinary people and the hardships they faced and joys they treasured are a doorway to another time and people like Pete Seeger made that story accessible.  Agree with him or not, he was a man of convictions who did not stray but held the line.  He wrote and sung the words of generations of people.  Sadly, no one today can match his eloquence and his passion.  He contributed and he will be missed.