But what about love?

Every author has a wheelhouse. It’s the thing they compose best, penning the type of stories which interest them the most. I have mine: the nerdy genres.

My completed novel is an adventure in a Middle Earth ish setting. I’ve also finished writing an early reader kids book. My two works in progress are a Christmas themed haunted story and a modern sci-fi about superpowers during a pandemic. If you were to scroll through the list of book ideas on my phone, you’ll see a recurring theme: fantasy, science fiction, and horror.

It makes sense. I was raised on a diet of CS Lewis and Star Wars. As I got older I explored the works of H.G. Wells and Michael Crichton. I spent my high school years secretly watching Star Trek: The Next Generation and X-Files because my parents would have said no if I asked permission. I’ve devoured almost everything written by Frank Peretti, Dean Koontz, and Steven King. A few books from King’s son Joe Hill have also passed through my reading list. The scary and fantastical tales are my wheelhouse.

My wife occasionally challenges me with a genre far outside my comfort zone. “You should write a romance novel.” It’s always a hard pass for me.

“I can’t.” I tell her.

Not an erotic story. She makes sure I know she doesn’t want me to write anything steamy. What she wants from me is a cozy romance like her favorite author Nicholas Sparks.

Still, I object. It’s not a lack of desire fueling my adamant nos. There’s been an idea for a romantic comedy rattling inside my cranium for nearly three decades which I would write if I was talented enough. But I’m not, so I don’t.

Reasons I’m unable to author love stories abound. I don’t read romance novels so I’m unfamiliar with the structure and tropes of the genre. I’m still learning how to write compelling female characters. And my previous attempts at lovey dovey prose sucked. I mean that with ten toes down. They were awful.

In a writing class I took a long time ago in a galaxy far away, the instructor told us there were four primary motivations for creating any form of art: anger, sadness, fear, and love. One could argue there is a fifth inspiration: drugs. But even intoxicated people experience terror, grief, ire, and adoration. “I love you man” says the drunkest dude at every tavern in America.

The teenaged version of me got his start with poetry. It’s all cheesy in hindsight but also decent considering my lack of maturity and experiential wisdom. When I was pissed off I could use words to explain how I felt. When I was afraid, my vocabulary was big enough to feel it. When I was heartbroken, my pen and paper were the only friends who could understand. But when I was in the throes of a crush, words failed me. I didn’t want to write about it, I wanted to experience it in its fullness - natural talents be damned.

My sorrow was internalized but elation was live and in color. Of course, even though I didn’t know it at the time, I was struggling with chronic depression. The religious community around me preached how negative emotions were sinful leaving me with no safe place to express myself. Instead I scribbled away in silence. Until I was happy, then I was free to display my emotions without a worry.

When I finally fell in love, I tried writing poetry to accompany my newfound affections. The end result was terrible. I made more than one attempt. Every repeated iteration was somehow worse than the previous so I eventually quit trying. Besides, it is easier to sing along with love songs than to compose one myself.

When it comes to crazy stupid love, the deeply committed bond with nearly divine intimacy, words are not my forte. I’m not much of a romantic. Just ask my wife. I’m more goofy and awkward. Besides, other people are better at describing these emotions of tenderness and passion.

For example: I’m reading “Watching Evil Dead: Unearthing the Radiant Artist Within” by Josh Malerman. The book is about the twin trajectories of his writing career and his relationship with his wife through the perspective of introducing his wife to one of his favorite movies which she had never seen.

courtesy of Del Rey/Penguin Random House

As Malerman, his wife, and some friends prepared to press play on the DVD and watch 1981’s The Evil Dead, he says the following.

“She’s smiling and it feels like we’re alone on a gently rocking boat. Not that the world is turning but we’re out to sea and we’ve been out to sea since we met. I wonder if that’s a hallmark of love - the two of you could be anywhere but when you look at each other it’s just you two alone on the adventure.”

Just like that, the author of “Bird Box” elloquently explained how I feel about my wife better than I could have imagined on my own. Annie is my partner in adventures both past and future. We have been together for what will be ten years soon and I still get that feeling when I look at her, that sense she is the only thing that matters in my world. I’m not mad at Malerman for beating me to the punch. His words are beautiful, painting a picture I could see but never describe. It’s like he psychically delved into my temporal lobe and recognized the mess of creative ability and shortcomings and said “Me too, I got your back.”

If you want me to tell a story about an ad executive in Seattle who sees ghosts, I can do that. A tale about a kid who reappears simultaneously in multiple cities after being missing for ten years? I’m on it. A dystopian world where death is impossible? Sure, that’s in my wheelhouse. But that romantic comedy about a single lady who caught a bouquet at a wedding and rushes to get married before her best friend’s wedding? Maybe someday, but not any time soon. Although, if that someday ever arrives, my wife will be satisfied.

Fantastic Four: A Timeline

November 1961: The Fantastic Four debuted with issue #1 for Marvel Comics. This is the first team of heroes created by the collaboration between Jack Kirby and Stan Lee. Due to their popularity among readers and their status of being an actual family in fictional continuity, the Four quickly became known as the first family of Marvel.

Image courtesy Marvel Comics

While superhero teams were not a new concept in the world of comic books, Fantastic Four were unique because they were a family. The first issues introduced Reed Richards (Mr Fantastic) as a man with an elastic body and his girlfriend Sue Storm (Invisible Woman) who could become invisible and project an invisible force field around her. The two would later get married. Also on the team was Johnny Storm (Human Torch), Sue’s brother who could fly and light himself on fire. The last member was Ben Grimm (Thing) who was Reed’s college room mate and possessed a body made or rock. Like all families, this one bickered a lot adding their family drama into the tension of fighting supervillains and anti-heroes like Namor, Dr Doom, Annihilation, and the Silver Surfer.

July 1963: with issue #16, Marvel dropped the The. The Fantastic Four officially became Fantastic Four.

1975: Fantastic Four is released as a radio show starring Bill Murray as Human Torch. It doesn’t last long.

1977: Bill Murray joined the cast of Saturday Night Live, completely redeeming his role as Human Torch.

September 1967: Hannah-Barbera produces a cartoon Fantastic Four series. It lasts for a rear. The cartoon is revived in 1978 with a different producer. The revival does not include Human Torch, instead they have a robot servant named H.E.R.B.I.E who is incorporated into the comics.

Image courtesy Hannah-Barbera

1979: another cartoon broadcasts titled Fred and Barney Meet the Thing. Thing is the only F4 character featured in the series and gave us the catch phrase “Thing-rings, do your thing!” We’ll pretend this doesn’t exist.

Image courtesy Hannah-Barbera

1985: Questprobe 3 was released as an 8 bit game on the Atari. It only featured Human Torch and Thing.

Image courtesy of Adventure International

1986: Constantin Film purchases film rights to Fantastic Four. Those rights were set to expire 12/31/92 if a movie isn’t produced.

1992: Constantin Film teams up with Roger Corman (known for creating countless B-movies) to produce the first Fantastic Four movie on a $1 million budget. Constantin Film had to make this movie to prevent film rights from being reverted back to Marvel. It was set to be in theaters Labor Day weekend of 1993 but that never happened because it was so terrible. It was never officially released but can be pirated online.

Image courtesy of New Concorde

October 1997: Fantastic Four was released as a beat ‘em up style video game on the original PlayStation.

Image courtesy Acclaim Entertainment

2004: 20th Century Fox acquired the film rights to Fantastic Four.

July 2005: 20th Century Fox releases Fantastic Four starring Ioan Gruffudd as Mr Fantastic, Jessica Alba as Invisible Woman, Chris Evans as Human Torch, and Michael Chiklis as Thing. It got mixed reviews. I thought it was just OK. Not bad but not good either.

Image courtesy 20th Century Fox

September 2006: debut of the cartoon series Fantastic Four: World's Greatest Heroes.

Image courtesy Taffy Entertainment

October 2006: The Fantastic Four we’re playable characters in the game Ultimate Alliance. A month later it was released on the PlayStation2, then on the Wii another month later. They appeared in the sequel but not playable, and they were playable again as DLC in the third game of the series.

Image courtesy Activision

June 2007: Fox premiers the movie sequel. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer debuts to more mixed reviews. While I don’t think it was a great movie, I enjoyed it more than its predecessor. There were plans for a third movie that never materialized.

Image courtesy 20th Century Fox

September 2009: Debut of the cartoon Super Hero Squad. This show features a wide variety of marvel characters and frequently includes members of Fantastic Four. My older three kids were obsessed with this show when it came out.

Image courtesy Marvel Animation

2011: Chris Evans is cast as Captain America in the MCU, completely redeeming his role as Human Torch.

August 20015: Fox released the Josh Trank Fant4stic starring stars Miles Teller as Mr Fantastic, Kate Mara as Invisible Woman, Michael B. Jordan as Human Torch, Jamie Bell as Thing. This movie was created for the same reason as the unreleased Fantastic Four movie - to prevent the film rights from expiring and reverting back to Marvel. And just like the 90s F4 movie, it sucked. It was trashed by critics, ignored by fans, and won two golden raspberry awards (worst director and worst picture).

Image courtesy 20th Century Fox

2018: Michael B. Jordan was cast as Killmanger in Black Panther, completely redeeming his role as Human Torch.

March 2019: Disney bought 21st Century Fox, returning Fantastic Film rights to Marvel Studios.

July 2019: Kevin Feige appeared at San Diego Comic-Con to announce the slate of upcoming MCU projects in production, which included Fantastic Four.

Image courtesy Marvel Studios

May 2022: Mr Fantastic has a brief appearance in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness as a member of The Illuminati. He’s portrayed by fan casting favorite John Krasinski.

Image courtesy Marvel Studios

September 2022: At the D23 Expo, Kevin Feige announced a director (Matt Shakman) and a release date (11/8/24). The release has since been pushed back to 7/25/25.

November 2023: It is heavily rumored then confirmed Pedro Pascal was cast to play Mr Fantastic in the MCU. This is a disappointment to many (including me) who wanted to see John Krasinski continue this character. Since Pascal perfected his geek chops as a loner escorting a special child to safety in The Mandalorian and as a loner escorting a special child to safety in The Last Of Us, jokes started circulating social media asking which special child he would escort to safety in Fantastic Four.

February 2024: For Valentine’s Day, Marvel Studios released a teaser image for Fantastic Four confirming the cast. Pedro Pascal as Mr Fantastic, Vanessa Kirby as Invisible Woman, Joseph Quinn as Human Torch, and Ebon Moss-Bachrach as Thing. Easter eggs in the announcement confirm rumors that the movie would be set in the sixties.

Image courtesy Marvel Studios

To Be President (On Paper)

The constitutional requirements for someone to become the President of the United States of American is embarrassingly sparse. Or at least, the qualifications to be eligible are few.

1. Must be at least 35 years old. Technically a 34 year old could campaign as long as they turn 35 before the inauguration.
2. Must be a natural born citizen of the USA. There’s been lots of arguments about what that means, and that’s a debate I do not wish to settle.
3. Must have been an American resident for at least 14 years. Suck it ex-pats.

That’s it. You gotta live here, be born here, and be 35 or older. With math and some rough estimations, that’s roughly 120 million Americans who are eligible to become president. Why don’t more people run? Well, from a humorist’s perspective, the only people who want to become president are the kinds of people who should never be president. Theory has it one must be pathologically narcissistic to run for president.

In reality though, money rules the USA. Only rich people can afford to run for president. That takes our estimated 120 million eligible natural born American residents over the age of 35 down to a list of 22 million millionaires. But 1% of millionaires are under 35, so some more calculations give us 21.7 million who meet the constitutional standards to be president and possess the capital to run for office.

Even money and meeting qualifications aren’t enough. You need to be accepted by a party and we all know there’s enough infighting in politics to exclude certain candidates from their own party’s primaries. Even if one is on the primary ballot, those candidates must appeal to the most extreme elements of their base to make it through to the general election. If we’ve learned anything from the 2016 and 2020 elections, overcrowded clown cars in the primaries tend to provide the worst possible candidates in the general election.

All things considered, from the wealth to the influence of the fringes - becoming president is not simple. However, I believe it’s too easy to qualify to be president. Being the right age, naturally born, and residing in America is not enough. Our guidelines should be a little more stringent. If I had it my way (which we all know I don’t) I would include a few more requirements for anyone to be eligible for the presidency.

1. Be a natural born citizen of the USA.
2. Reside in the USA for at least the previous 14 years.
3. Be 35 years of age or older.
4. Must have one election for either municipal, state, or federal position.
5. Cannot be the parent, child, spouse, or sibling of a previous President.
6. Can only run for President once unless running for reelection.

Just imagine how different our United States would be right now if we had these rules.

George W Bush would have never been President.
Hillary Clinton would not have been the DNC candidate in 2016.
Carly Fiorina would not have been in the GOP 2016 primary.
We wouldn’t have heard jokes about Low Energy Jeb.
Donald Trump would still be a reality TV star and polarizing celebrity instead of a former president facing multiple indictments.
Tom Steyer would not have been in the DNC 2020 primary.
There’d be no need for Chris Christie to withdraw from the 2024 race.
Vivek Ramaswamy would not have had a 2024 campaign to terminate.
Jill Stein would’t be currently running for the Green Party.
We would have had candidates of greater quality in the previous two and current elections.

How much better off would our nation be right now if the 2016 election was Marco Rubio or Ben Carson versus Bernie Sanders or Martin O’Malley? Where would we be if Pete Buttigieg or Andrew Yang won the nomination four years ago instead of Joe Biden.

Looking into the future, these three new requirements I propose would prevent Michelle Obama or Don Jr from running for president because they are the offspring of or married to a former president. Kamala Harris would be disqualified from running for President because she ran in 2020. As much as I like Cory Booker and John Kasich, neither of them would qualify to run for President because they were unsuccessful in their last attempts. No more Ron DeSantis or Beto O'Rourke or the national stage. We wouldn’t have any random rich dudes who got wealthy through pharmaceutical or tech startups decide they are smart enough to run the country. No more real estate moguls or CEOs who sold the SuperSonics to OKC thinking their wealth qualifies them to be the POTUS.

Theoretically speaking of course. What do I know? I’m just a dude who writes books and plays music for other people.

In Twitter We Musk

If you’re on Twitter, you have probably witnessed the pandemonium. Employees fired. Employees quitting. Accounts deactivated. Fake accounts. Parody accounts. Spectators predicting doom. Senators threatening regulation. Declarations of the end of the world. Ahem, I mean the end of Twitter. All because the son of a wealthy apartheid era South African emerald mine magnate used his massive grifted fortune propped up with substantial loans to purchase a popular social media site with 436 million users for some weird experiment in chaos theory.

It’s been a few interesting weeks watching Twitter’s dumpster fire erupt in real time. I don’t know if it’s more appropriate to compare this disaster to Twitanic or Twittergeddon but either way, it’s fascinating. As I’ve read news articles, studied reactions of those I follow, and continued to tweet as if everything is fine, I’ve gathered a few pertinent observations. If Twitter is a microcosm of the real world, here are some lessons we could all learn from this theoretical demise of Twitter.

1. Irony is lost. There is something oddly surreal about the phrase #twitterisdead being a trending topic on Twitter. How can it be dead if we’re all using it to find out if it’s dead? It might be dying but it is not dead. At least not yet. Even Elon Musk recognized this contradiction and tweeted this photo as a response.  

courtesy of the manbaby Elon Musk

2. Humanity is gullible. We (generally speaking) will believe anything with a blue check mark next to it. We’ll believe anything spoken on our favorite news channel. We fall for conspiracy theories and propaganda bots like we’ve been brainwashed. Perhaps it’s confirmation bias - we believe the things that solidify the things we already wish were true.

3. Humanity is brilliant. While this point seems to contradict the latter, we must realize life is not a strict dichotomy. Humanity is so smart because it is also incredibly stupid. We see the weaknesses of ill-advised decisions and exploit them. Who else would pay $8 a month to create a billion dollar stock loss for an evil corporation? Only someone with high (even if devious) intelligence.

4. If the apocalypse was to begin tomorrow, it will be both terrifying and hilarious. Whether alien invasion or solar flare, polar shift or zombie hordes, humanity will be unprepared to survive. However, we will have jokes. We will battle the literal end of the world with memes and GIFs. There is no plan B. We can’t even come up with a suitable replacement for Twitter, how are we ever to survive global annihilation?

5. Wealth does not equal competence. Elon Musk is the richest person in the world yet becoming the CEO of Twitter might be his undoing. Being insanely rich hasn’t made him a good boss. Being able to swim in his money like Scrooge McDuck hasn’t made handling the twitterly reins any easier. Affluence is not the same thing as business acumen.

While we’re at it, perhaps allowing the richest people in the world control everything is a bad idea. The end of Twitter is nothing more than the obvious result of oligarchally influenced unfettered capitalism. But what do I know? I’m just a poor boy, nobody tweets me.

The New Breed

Kids these days. When I hear that phrase in normal conversation, it’s usually uttered with a scowl and a hint of disdain. It’s always a complaint about the younger generation. They’re weird, disrespectful, and don’t follow any of the rules. The irony is often overlooked - the people voicing their ire against the youth are regurgitating the same complaints older folks had about them when they were teens.

Kids these days. When I say it, it’s spoken with awe and hope. They are weird, and it’s wonderful. They’re brilliant, smarter than their elders want to acknowledge. They’re devious by necessity. And they don’t do anything the way it’s always been done.

There is something different about how they rebel than generations before them. My parents’ peers rebelled with bell bottoms and long hair. My generation rebelled with ripped jeans and feedback fueled guitars. At the end of our wild days, from the elder millennials upward through the baby boomers, we found our way into the workforce just like the generations before us. We hashed out our need to be different then learned to be the same.

Kids these days don’t have the liberty to do what we did. They rebel because they don’t have any other choice. From education to business, into every corner of entertainment from sports to art, to the way government functions, kids these days are taking a different approach than the way we’ve always done it because our paths are not available to them.

Kids these days watched the concept of a career and job security evaporate for their parents and grandparents. They’ve observed the decorum of the general public devolve in recent years. They know the economy the rest of us enjoyed doesn’t exist anymore so they’re doing things differently. If they must work with the public, they’re doing it on their own terms.

courtesy of Dazed & Confused Magazine

20 year old musicians have never lived in a world without American Idol. Teenagers don’t know what life was like before YouTube. The idea of break out viral stars has been a part of their collective consciousness since birth. The days of mailing demo tapes to record labels is ancient history to them, and kids these days are using social media to release music whenever they want.

Literary publishing is adapting to meet younger trends. Kids these days never typed out a manuscript on a typewriter, never waited at a Kinkos while their book was printed, and never used snail mail to query agents. It was never required of them. Technology has made it easier for young writers to self publish, connect with agents, find editors, and sign deals with publishers through Twitter and TikTok.
Kids these days are accomplishing mind boggling feats in athletics, destroying nearly every record that ever existed. Technology and science has made sports safer, kids more adaptable, and injuries easier to heal.

Politics are wild for kids these days. It’s been 23 years since the Columbine shooting. New voters registering to vote for the first time in their lives have grown up with active shooter drills. There’s never been a time in their lives when mass shootings were not a thing. They’ve spent their whole lives in a post-9/11 world. The only thing they’ve experienced from our government is nepotism, deep partisan divisions, culture wars, and the ever growing wealth gap. If they seem politically radical, it’s because we created an environment that fosters racialism.

Old folks these days. Some of y’all look at kids these days the same way Anakin looked at the younglings in the Jedi Temple after he turned to the dark side. Y’all fear what you don’t understand and want to destroy anything you can’t control.

courtesy of Lucasfilm

You think kids these days are weird because they are. We made them this way. Kids these days are a new breed of human, diverging from the way things have always been done because we gave them no other choice. For better or worse, the future belongs to them. Once we’re gone, this world is theirs.

There is one thing clear to me about these younglings: they are going to change the world. They’re doing it with or without us. The rest of us need to be more like Obi Wan, less like Darth Vader. If we’re not ready to help kids these days, it’s time for us to get out of their way.

courtesy of Lucasfilm

Deconstructing Love

True love waits. At least, that’s what I was taught when I was growing up. My adolescence began with the birth of grunge and graduated with the publication of I Kissed Dating Goodbye. In the years between 1991 and 1997, purity culture took root in evangelical churches, leaving its well intentioned mark (ahem, scars) on my generation. Looking back, I am fairly confident this is the source my emotional baggage and the reason I am a psychological mess.

My experience isn’t unique. Instagram, Tik Tok, YouTube, and Twitter are littered with the wreckage of grownups like me, who lived through the 90s, and flailed our way through the last 20 years wondering what the hell happened to us. One testimonial after another, first hand accounts, teary-eyed disclosures, secrets people kept buried for decades. Even the author of I Kissed Dating Goodby disavowed his book as garbage, apologized for the harm he caused, and delivered a TED Talk admitting he was wrong.

But why? What was so misguided about the pursuit of purity? How did messages about abstinence and love lead to an abundance of former youth group kids trying to navigate adulthood through sexual dysfunction, broken marriages, depression, anxiety, body dysmorphia, and abysmal self-loathing? I have some thoughts.

Photo courtesy of Gratisography

1. It used confusing terminology. Dating was discouraged as if it was sinful. They taught us dating and breaking up only to date and break up with someone new created an unfaithful pattern we would take into marriage, ultimately leading to an inevitable divorce. Instead, boys were told to court girls. The emphasis in courtship was to prepare you for marriage. Unfortunately, neither term (dating or courting) are in the Bible and such teaching completely ignored biblical wedding traditions. Sexual lessons resembled American Puritan values more than those of the first century church. Besides, there really isn’t any actual difference between the two. You can still break up courtship just like a dating relationship. Dating can prepare you for marriage just like courting. Courting is nothing more than a fancy term for dating. Condemning one in favor of the other is like kicking your own ass.

2. It misunderstood human biology and brain chemistry. As a result, boys were provided excuses and girls got assigned blame. The church took scientific ideas about hormones and attraction, made dozens of assumptions, then spit out restrictive rules with neither scientific or biblical basis. Boys like me were instructed to avoid all temptations, but we were also told we were helpless to resist our urges. Girls were never cautioned against their temptations, rather they were warned to not be a temptation for boys. When boundaries were pushed and broken, the same people who claimed boys will be boys also asked the girls what they were wearing.

3. It demonized everything. The music we listened to, the nooks and magazines we read, the movies and television shows we watched, all of it was painted with a broad brush of being inherently evil. Any mention of sex was taboo, depictions of romance in pop culture, and secular descripdeclarations of love were deemed the devil’s attempt to lead us astray. We were encouraged to boycott everything from Disney to Levi’s for their unholy embrace of love outside of God’s design. This fostered an unhealthy “us vs them” mindset which festered into the isolationist beliefs currently staining our world.

4. It turned modesty and purity into idols. The Bible frequently talks about having a pure heart. The lone biblical reference to dressing modestly was about about wealth - modesty over extravegance. I don’t want to claim that either are bad things. However, these admirable goals become problematic when they become the most important thing. Christians should strive to be Christlike above all other things. What good is remaining sexually pure if you’re dishonest? Does dressing modestly matter if you’re cruel to those who don’t? The book of 1 Peter says “be holy because I am holy.” Not “be pure.” When you preach “don’t have sex” more frequently than “pursue God” purity is an idol. When boys can wear tank tops but girls can’t, modesty is an idol.

5. It failed to teach the true meaning of love. The 13th chapter of Corinthians listed off qualities of love - the things it is and the things it’s not. You know what word isn’t there? Pure. Neither is the word modest. Yet somehow, the pastors and leaders running youth groups when I was a teen seemed to to preach and teach modesty and purity as if they were the essence of love. And waiting? The phrase “true love waits” was inescapable. While the first definition provided in Paul’s letter to the church in Corinth says “love is patient,” true love is more than just waiting. I love French fries but if I wait to long to eat them, they’ll get cold and gross. There is so much variety in both the meaning and application of love glossed over or deemed unimportant. Perhaps it’s the laziness of the conservative evangelical movement or the unfortunate inadequacies of the English language, but the depths and power of love were never discussed with my generation. We never pondered the mystery of how the word we use to explain how we feel about a romantic partner is the same word describing our appetite for pizza. True love doesn’t just wait. It’s committed. It’s a bond of friendship and intimacy. It’s familial and erotic. And it is a long suffering which ensures hardships and continues to love when everything else has given up. These truths were never a part of the Wednesday night youth group discussions at Marysville Nazarene through the 90s. Judging from conversations I have had with friends across the US; from stories told and retold through books, blogs, seminars, and videos by exvangelicals, I know my experience isn’t an anomaly.

Why does any of this matter? How did these teachings of purity culture warp how my generation viewed ourselves and approached relationships? What led these good intentions to cause so much damage? We can follow purity teaching to its furthest logical conclusion and we see this in the behaviors and outlook of my peers who, like me, grew up in 90s era churches.

Using confusing terminology creates confusing boundaries. At many Christian colleges, there was an impression that any boy asking a girl out for a date – even something as innocent as getting a cup of coffee – meant the boy was interested in marrying the girl. It left people clueless about the intentions of anyone thinking they’re cute or even saying “hi.” It made maintaining friendships with members of a different gender difficult, if not impossible. It led to numerous unhappy couples who rushed into marriage without learning the kinds of things you learn while dating.

Giving boys excuses for their behaviors while blaming girls for the same actions creates an environment where rape and sexual assault thrive. It fosters men’s worst proclivities, allowing them to be abusers with a free pass. This is why #yesallwomen, #metoo, and #churchtoo have all been trending topics over the past few years.

Demonizing every product of pop culture teaches kids to be ashamed for liking the things they like. They feel bad for listening to their favorite songs or watching a popular TV show. They hide their interests and nothing good happens in hidden shame. They grow up developing guilty pleasures and destructive addictions. Make the topic of sex taboo and you get people embarrassed to discuss it – even in the confines of an intimate relationship.

The focus on purity and modesty distract from other essential qualities: kindness, humility, fidelity, affability, honesty, and perseverance. Kids were instructed to be sexually pure but they weren’t taught how to be good people. They’re awkward and malicious but at least they’re virgins.

When the only message kids get about sex and love is “true love waits until marriage,” you get young adults in a hurry to get married just to have sex – like it’s the only reason to get married. They’re ignorant of the nuances, commitment, and passion it takes to have a healthy and happy marriage. They’ve been told to wait but not what to do when the waiting is over.

My generation took the tenets of purity culture and thought we had the secret to lasting wedded bliss and yet so many of us still found our marriages ending in divorce. Many of us abandoned the ideas of purity culture, evangelicalism, and even Christianity due to the harm caused by the faulty teachings of our youth. However, what hurt me the most and twisted my psyche in ways I’m still trying to untangle were the incompatible and contradictory elements of what I was taught.

One of the most fundamental beliefs of the Christian faith is God IS love. From the youngest ages, we were taught this through song: “Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so.” Over and over, teachers and pastors and church elders reminded us: God loves you unconditionally. According to scripture, there’s nothing we could do that could separate us from God’s love for us. Then as we got older, we began hearing different messages from the church. Leaders started telling us we were unlovable. We were taught that we did not deserve love – especially if we didn't adhere to purity rules. God loves you but you’re worthless. God loves you but you’re undeserving.

Photo courtesy of Gratisography

This is one of the many reasons why I deconstructed. Despite a crippling deprecating image of self, I did everything right. I believed God loved me and I didn’t deserve it. I waited for marriage. I married a Christian woman. I remained faithful. I was active in church. I followed the doctrine of purity culture. And I still got divorced. Doing all of the “correct” things doesn’t guarantee success. Purity doesn’t inoculate you from the pain and suffering of broken relationships. Even the author of I Kissed Dating Goodbye ended his marriage. Purity teachings doesn’t work. Looking at the tattered lives of my generation, it’s safe to say it did more harm than good.

Now I’ve deconstructed what I thought love was. I meditated on 1 Corinthians 13. I studied every mention of love in scripture. I read all of the Bible stories of sex and marriage from Genesis to The Song of Solomon to Revelation. I concluded the evangelical church led me astray.

The Bible teaches all people – men and women were created in the image of God. If (as I was taught) we are unworthy of love, then God would also be unworthy of love as we reflect God’s image. This idea of being unconditionally loved by a worthless lover is illogical; I refuse to believe it. It is also completely unbiblical. The book of 1 John tells us “God is love.” If we bear his image, then humanity was created to love and be loved. We need love and deserve love.

It’s time to reclaim the definition of real love. The type of love that is selfless and kind. The love that is devoted in the midst of hard times.The love that celebrates the successes of others. The love that lifts and elevates their communities. The love that flourishes in equality and justice. Love that always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love that loves the way God loves us. A love that loves when it waits and loves when it doesn’t wait. A love that deserves love.

The kind of love that craves Chinese food on a stormy night. That too.





ps: I love you

In a Rush?

Floating in Heaven or roasting in Hell? I don’t know and the actual answer doesn’t matter to me. All I know is deciding a person’s eternal destination is above my pay grade. I’m not the judge of humankind, which is probably a good thing because if I was, Hell would be forced to hang up a “no vacancy” sign. Honestly, I tend to be far more judgmental than I have any right to be. It’s a character flaw.

As critical as I can be for the living, I aim to be more generous of the recently departed. Not everyone shares my strategy. When RBG passed away last fall, Cd’A area pastor Paul Van Noy made a public statement claiming she’s wicked and should not be celebrated as a national hero. This week, I saw similar sentiments from the opposite end of the political spectrum in response to the death of Rush Limbaugh. It seems the people who were fans of one reviled the other.

This is where the cynical jerk who typically holds a tight grip on the steering wheel in my brain eases off the gas pedal and consults the atlas to navigate these scenarios. When half my twitter feed claims heaven gained a new angel, and the other half partied like a grim reaper welcoming Hell’s newest resident, my centrist nature ran a cost-benefit analysis between being a saint and an asshole. I found myself straddling the fence.

I don’t know what Rush truly thought about God, but I know what I believe God thought about Rush. I believe God loved him like God loves every other person on Earth. I also know Rush professed to share my religious faith. Yet, when I listened to him I did not hear the same Christian morals which guide my values. Did Rush satisfy the biblical principle affording salvation to anyone who believes in their heart and professes with their mouth? I can’t answer that. I heard his words but I couldn’t see his heart. Again, such power is above my pay grade.

All I’m left with are mixed biblical commands and wise secular advice. My religion says to avoid stuff like bitterness, wrath, anger, and malice. My bible also instructs me not to speak evil and show perfect courtesy. Social norms tell us to not speak ill of the dead. Edmund Burke once advised, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

How do we balance it all? Rush was a professional provocateur who earned millions pissing off others – either pissed at him or pissed at the people he didn’t like. He normalized misogyny, bigotry, and homophobia. He turned spite into a righteous cause. He revolutionized the American political landscape from the comforts of a radio production booth. As much as he was beloved by conservatives, he was also perceived as evil by liberals.

What am I to do as someone who believes that we should let go of anger when speaking of someone who taught us it’s OK to be angry? How do we recognize someone’s death might end the abuse of others? Is not speaking ill of an evil dead allowing evil to thrive by doing nothing? Should we criticize or honor, celebrate or mourn?

Neither.

I refuse to speak ill of the dead, but I don’t have to revel in their death either. If the dead is an individual who harmed society, I believe there is a better option than saying nothing and doing nothing at all.

Which leads us back to Limbaugh.

Are you mad about Rush’s treatment of women? Did it bother you when he said feminism was created to give ugly women a chance, or claimed things started going downhill after women were granted the right to vote? Were you creeped out when he sexualized the way women walk or when he called a 12 year old girl a dog? Do you believe he contributed to rape culture by claiming consent was a tool of liberals, tried to explain how women really mean yes when they say no, or said women protesting sexual harassment actually wished they had been harassed? Did you cringe every time he called a woman a slut or a ho? Did you roll your eyes when he said women have easier lives than men?

Then donate clothes, food, or funds to a women’s shelter. Support the National Women’s Law Center. Volunteer with organizations that help women escaping domestic violence, human trafficking, prostitution, and pornography. Respect the women in your lives and treat them with dignity.

Are you offended by his treatment of the LGBT community? Were you annoyed by his sexual jokes mocking gay people? Are you mad about his slippery slope argument that legalizing gay marriage would lead to pedophilia? Did you think it was bad taste for him to ridicule AIDS victims while circus music played in the background during his AIDS Update segment?

Then locate and support a local Gay Straight Alliance club. Donate to charities and support groups like The Trevor Project or It Gets Better Project. Spend time with your queer friends and listen to their coming out stories; if you don’t have any LGBT friends, make some.

Did his views on race anger you? Were you dumbfounded when he said all police sketches of criminal suspects look like Jesse Jackson? When he played a song called “Barak the Magic Negro” on his radio show, were you enraged? Did you argue with his claim there are more Native Americans alive today than any time in history or that Columbus saved us from the Natives? Do you think he was wrong to say “who the hell cares” about black voters because they’re a minority of the voting populace? Were you mad when he said the NBA should change their name to the Thug Basketball Association and sport teams should be called gangs?

Then shop at black owned businesses. Attend events organized by your local chapter of the NAACP. Listen to and learn from black voices. Support criminal justice reform measures and other legislation that aims to end racial inequity. Donate to charities dedicated to improving African American communities like the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, Black Girls CODE, or Campaign Zero.

Were you enraged by his treatment of disabilities, drugs, and health? Did you want to defend Michael J Fox when Rush claimed he was exaggerating the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease? Did you yell at your radio when he said nicotine wasn’t addictive and smoking doesn’t cause lung cancer? Were you puzzled when he claimed fitness enthusiasts were taxing our health care system?

Then join a gym, exercise more, and eat a healthier diet. If you’re a smoker, quit smoking. If you’re struggling with addiction, seek help. Support, volunteer, and donate to organizations like The Michael J Fox Foundation, St Jude, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, Truth, or To Write Love on Her Arms.

I will not celebrate Rush’s death, nor will I speak ill of the dead. However, I will celebrate the people the dead spoke ill of while he was still alive.

The Theory of American Everything Part 4: A Personal Lesson

Here is my theory of American everything: we are a nation birthed in rebellion and given the freedom to do, say, and believe anything we want. It’s what makes us the best country in the world, and it makes us the worst ever. 

Why does this matter? Because I share a trait with the common conspiracy theorist: I want my world to make sense. 

In times of unsettling changes, through momentous events or devastating tragedies, in the wake of upheaval, some individuals experience feelings of uncertainty and anxiety. The bigger world seems senseless leading people to feel disconnected and powerless. Then they hear about a grand conspiracy. For reasonable people, the tale is nothing more than a ridiculous or outlandish fantasy with no plausible basis in reality. Yet it is different for the theorist; they cling to it as it makes them feel special. They’re armed with the satisfaction of being one of the select few who have access to a secret truth. Any evidence to disprove their theory is interpreted as proof of the conspiracy. Anyone who doesn’t believe is either a part of the conspiracy or just needs to do their own research. They feel superior because they know something you don't know. The sensation is intoxicating.  

A never before felt sense of belonging leads some people believe the Freemasons are secretly controlling the course of historical events, or think celebrities are members of the Illuminati after rapidly rising from obscurity to superstar popularity. People feel powerful for the first time in their lives believing the moon landing was a hoax or alien aircraft has been hidden in a hangar inside Area 51. 

When events happens with an intensity, magnitude, or suddenness to alter the course of a culture, people look for answers. When a popular president was assassinated during a public parade, theorists rejected the official conclusion of a lone gunman and concocted complex conspiracies of a second or third shooter. When terrorists flew planes into buildings, theorists couldn’t believe a fire was hot enough to weaken the World Trade Center into catastrophic structural failure, so they invented ideas of planted explosive charges and called it an inside job. After every school shooting, theorists ignore the eye witness accounts and live video, declare it a false flag operation, and believe the victims were paid crisis actors. Their theories are absurd and easily debunked, yet it gives them what they want - to make sense of senseless tragedy. They want an explanation for the unexplainable. They want order for the disordered. 

I want the same thing. I want my world to make sense. However, this current era of history is completely illogical. I don’t understand how the nation who collaborated to build the first transcontinental railroad is the same nation who dreamed up pizzagate. I don’t understand how the American mindset which inspired great speeches like the Gettysburg Address also motivated tweets like covfefe. I don’t understand how the voters who claim celebrities shouldn’t share their political opinions elected a celebrity to be president. I don’t understand anyone who can’t see the racism behind statements like “I hit them with neo-Nazi. I hit them with everything. I got the white supremacists, the neo-Nazi. I got them all in there. Let's see. KKK, we have KKK. I got them all." I don’t understand why police officers continue to act like executioners with impunity over and over again. I don’t understand why people are so offended by the phrase “black lives matter.” And I refuse to accept any of this as normal. 

I need clarity because I’m a moderate voter living in the middle of Trump country and need to learn how to show my neighbors grace when they view people like me with disdain. Because I have four inquisitive kids who ask a lot of questions and I need to answer them when they want to know why people act with so much greed and hatred. Because I have a two day old baby and I am filled with grief over the America she has been born into. Because the violence and division in this country is antithetical to the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness our founders conceived. Because I want to answer those questions which have no easy answers. 

Someday, history books will have to explain the Trump era. 2020 will be discussed in classrooms across America and students of the future will debate the effectiveness of our actions. When they ask why we did what we did, I hope their teachers explain it was because we were birthed in rebellion and given the freedom to believe the most ridiculous ideas imaginable. We were, as Lady Gaga would say, born this way.

The Theory of American Everything Part 3: A Philosophical Lesson

I am not an anthropologist but I am a student of pop culture. I am not a psychologist but I have studied how people think and behave. I don’t know everything there is to know about humanity but I know a lot. Rather, I know enough to make me dangerous. 

Humankind (generally speaking) is selfish. People are tribalistic by nature. We seek to protect our tribe and vie for status among it. Anyone outside our tribe is viewed as a threat and anyone who challenges our position is an enemy. Regardless of the relationships we have within our tribe, we all want to elevate ourselves in some fashion. There’s a basic human need to be accepted, and a secondary need to have people look at us with honor or respect. We just want to be special - often more special than those around us. This feeds our drive to succeed, be the best, climb corporate ladders, find popularity, accumulate wealth, and demonstrate power. 

Institutions are not perfect either. Governments, religions, businesses, families, schools. In theory, all of them are wonderful and service essential purposes. On paper it should work flawlessly. However, as soon as people get involved, it veers off course. No one is perfect. We all make mistakes. Those imperfections infect every structure and system involving a person. I’ve never seen a family or a corporation or a government exist without people. Therefore, all of them are inherently flawed by human existence. 

What does any of this have to do with the reason Americans are the way we are? Well … Everything.

Our founding fathers were human in every respect. They were selfish, arguing in favor or laws and systems that would benefit their home colony over others. They debated and haggled and bargained as best as they could. Despite their attempts to form a new nation, a collective of United States, they were also fiercely tribalistic looking to secure the prosperity of their tribes - their home-states. The people who founded the USA were also imperfect people. Several owned slaves and most held racist beliefs against both African and indigenous people. Yet despite their flaws and greed, they managed to compose and ratify our founding documents and declare independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain. 

Our nation is secured in laws codified by revolutionary rebels. It is filled with brilliant ideas and (what seemed at the time) radical methods for governance. Yet as much as it continues to direct the decisions of judicial courts and legislative bodies of our nation, we must understand our constitution isn’t perfect. It is simultaneously wonderful and terrible. Beautiful and ugly. Rational and unreasonable. 

Even the people who authored it recognized this fact. They were aware of their own faults. They knew what they created was the best they could do with their circumstances and it would never be adequate forever and always. To remedy their shortcomings, they provided a method for future generations to fix their mistakes: constitutional amendments. It’s a process we’ve followed 27 times in the 232 years since the constitution was ratified. 

With more than two centuries of history between then and now, We haven’t cured what ails the American spirit. Rather, we have amplified it. Rebellion has grown to defiance. Selfishness has transformed into arrogance. And brokenness has fractured even deeper than the founding fathers could have imagined. 

They said, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Modern America makes some subconscious revisions to this statement. 

Many people see these words as if it says our unalienable rights are life, liberty, and happiness. We somehow believe we have the right to be happy and any person or law impeding our happiness is unjust and must be opposed. Other people add a word to the sentence, believing it guarantees the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of my happiness as if the emotional state of any singular person is more worthy than the well being of another. Our personal beliefs undermine the preceding statement: that we’re all created equal. 

We interpret the first amendment through the same narcissistic filter. We want the ability to freely worship our God and follow our rituals while expecting the government to restrict the worship and rituals from other religions. We want the liberty to speak our minds and be offensive but get offended when other people speak their minds. Media confirming our biases are fair and balanced but media with opposing bias is agenda driven fake news. We want to invade other people’s space as long as they don’t invade ours. It’s patriotic to criticize opposing political parties yet it’s treasonous when anyone criticizes our political party. 

Born with a rebellious spirit, given the freedoms to do and say and believe anything we want, in our right to pursue happiness, amplified by our egotistical philosophies. This is why we are the way we are.

American megalomania is not all bad. The liberty to dream big ideas without restriction spawned some of the greatest innovations in history: the assembly line, telephones, light bulbs, air conditioning, microwaveable popcorn. It attracted brilliant minds like Nickola Tesla and Albert Einstein, who left their homelands to bring their research and tinkering to American shores. It gifted us the beauty of national parks, the convenience of interstate highways, the entertainment of televisions, and the comfort of Snuggies. 

Freedom of speech is a mixed blessing. Both Martin Luther King Jr and David Duke spread their ideas under the banner of liberty, both seeking to inspire for diametric ideals. America gave us both Sojourner Truth and Robert E Lee, Dr Seuss and Hugh Hefner, Rachel Held Evans and Tomi Lahren. All of these people preached different values, but through American philosophy, each of them are equally valid. 

Our beliefs are also untamed. We glom onto any tenets which pique our curiosity. We embrace the craziest ideas because no one can tell us it’s wrong. It’s how the spiritualism movement attracted nearly eight million believers at the end of the 19th century. It’s why snake oil salesmen thrived at the dawn of the twentieth century. It’s how charismatic individuals like Rajneesh and Charles Manson attracted followers who would commit acts of violence in their names. It is why Heaven’s Gate and the Branch Davidians lured devotees to their deaths. It made room for the Tea Party, the alt-right, and antifa. It fuels ghost hunters and Bigfoot enthusiasts. It is the reason behind modern revivals of anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, and QAnon. 

When you grant a population the freedom to believe whatever they want, they will. Often at the cost of their own lives. The power of belief frequently trumps ideas of safety and health, especially when there’s a tantalizing promise of wealth, sex, power, status, or belonging.

The Diz-Files

Ever since Disney acquired Fox, rumors are swirling. Marvel fans have been speculating when the Fantastic Four and X-Men characters would be making their cinematic debuts under the official banner of Disney. Movie buffs are speculating which Hollywood stars will be portraying our favorite mutants. I even contributed my fan casting for a new Fantastic Four. The studio merger award a lot more to Disney than comic book heroes though. One of Disney's biggest gains was the original content Fox has produced over the years. With the launch of Disney Plus last fall, they heavily promoted one Fox property more than any other: The Simpsons.

It's cool. I can watch The Simpsons any time I want. Any episode from any season. All of the “Doh!” And “Eat my shorts” I can handle. To be honest though, I haven't watched The Simpsons in years. Despite seeing their thumbnail every time I open the Disney Plus app, I really haven't thought much about it.

Until this morning. For the first time since the deal between Fox and Disney was finalized, I pondered the marriage of the two companies. "If Disney owns Bart and Homer now, who else to they own?" I wondered. Fox created some amazing and groundbreaking shows over the last 30 years since The Simpsons debuted in 1989. What other incredible programming is available under the Disney umbrella?

I started thinking about some of my favorite shows from years passed. Does Disney own 24? Quick google check: yes they do. What about MadTV? Check google again ... nope. Fringe? Also no. The X-Files? Google says yes! Is The X-Files available on Disney Plus? It was one of my favorite shows when I was in high school. My parents didn't let me watch it so I'd have to sneak in episodes when they were busy or away from home. I'd love to introduce my oldest son to it - he'd probably dig the show.

Disney Plus, do you have The X-Files? Looks ... and ... no. Bummer.

Now that I realized the ownership of one of my all-time favorite shows belonged to Disney, my mind flooded with more questions.

Will The X-Files ever be available on Disney Plus?
How does Chris Carter feel about his creation changing ownership? It's like his career went full circle since he started his screenwriting career at Walt Disney Studios.
What if Disney hired Carter to write and direct for a Marvel film? He could do something cosmic like Nova. Or the sci-fi horror blend of Moon Knight would fit his style.
What does the future hold for The X-Files? Chris Carter has ideas about what is next but it's dependent on the participation of Gillian Anderson who has said she is permanently done with the show.
Reboot? Is that possible? What would a Disneyfied reboot of The X-Files be like?
What about crossover appeal? Between Marvel's shared universe and the Unified Pixar theory, Disney is big into interconnectedness. Just imagine what kind of synergy we could get from the FBI investigating the unsolved cases of Disney's paranormal phenomena. Could you see Mulder and Scully flying to Hawaii to search for a furry blue alien? I can.

image courtesy of Discussing Movies

Speaking of Mulder and Scully, are they Disney princesses now? Please tell me they're Disney Princesses.

Whatever Disney does with The X-Files, I'll be watching with no lights on. I hope the Smoking Man's in this one.

Protect Ya Neck: Sanity in the Age of Social Media

The internet is a weird place, both beautiful and ugly. It has given us the gift of social media, connecting distant relatives and old friends in ways we could have never predicted. That same gift is also a curse. The new possibilities that allowed people new methods to communicate gave other people freedom to communicate with the worst possible conduct. If you’re not careful, it would be easy to lose yourself as either a perpetrator or a victim in this wild west of online culture.

If you want to navigate the world of Social Media with your sanity intact, you need to follow the advice of the Wu Tang Clan: protect ya neck. Or as a decent therapist would tell you, set some boundaries.

These boundaries are a figurative fence around you, designed to protect your emotional state from those who would revel in provoking you. It looks different for everyone. What works for you might not be good for me, and what I do might sound absurd to others. Wil Wheaton deleted his twitter account to preserve his happiness – that was his boundary. Despite thousands of disappointed fans, he’s maintained this boundary because his well being is worth more than appeasing people who have zero vested interest in his personal life. I don’t need to employ those extremes, but I still need boundaries to prevent the ugliness of the online world from discouraging or demoralizing me.

To maintain my boundaries, I follow two rules. 1: I report spam, 2: I block trolls. That’s it. Pretty simple. These two rules help keep me healthy and happy.

Strangers send me ads or post suspicious links? I report them. An Instagram user tags me in a post letting me know how to get free followers? I report them. I’m followed by a Twitter user who is scandalously dressed in their profile picture? I report them. I get a Facebook friend request from someone I don’t know and all of their public posts promote their multilevel marketing business? I report them. I don’t have the time, patience, or energy to tolerate unsolicited shameless self-promotion.

Reporting people takes a little effort. Just a few mouse clicks and I feel like I’ve done my part to make social media a happier, healthier, and safer. Even if those goals are not achieved on the macro scale of society, it is accomplished in the micro scale of my soul. For my own personal sanity, all spam is reported.

As for trolls, it gets a little more complicated. I define trolling as a stranger making remarks or comments to someone they don’t know with the specific intention to provoke. It’s important to specify (for me) this is an act committed by strangers. Within the context of friendship, a little mutual teasing is expected and acceptable. I don’t object to friends or family making a harsh joke at my expense. A shared laugh is a great way to bond. However, if I don’t know you or understand your sense of humor, the space to joke around is more restrictive. The threshold between having fun and trolling is too easily crossed. When people abuse that line, I block. No questions asked. I do not have the time or energy to engage. If you’re the kind of person to make personal attacks against me without knowing me, then I don’t have any interest in what you have to say. Nor do I want you to have access to see what I post on social media.

When a friend recently posted praise of Kanye’s newest album, I replied to share my perspective – that the album really isn’t that good. Rhyming patterns, lyrical complexity, production values, all of it in my opinion is a lower quality that what Kanye is capable of creating. The only reason anyone is excited about it is because of Kanye’s professed conversion to Christianity. If it wasn’t a gospel album, none of these people would compliment it. One of the claims I made in that long thread was how I don’t believe Christians should have to tolerate bad art just because the art was made by other Christians. Apparently, my statement was unpopular. About a half hour later, a stranger to me (but a friend of my friend) replied back to me with an accusation and a link. He doubted my claim to dislike bad music and linked to one of my public Facebook posts which contained a video of John Mayer performance. In essence, he was saying I didn’t have the right to call Kanye’s album trash if I liked a song from Mayer.

Consider this. Some random dude on the internet was so offended by my opinion about Kanye West that he dug through eight months of my public posts searching for anything I might have said to use against me in some sort of gotcha-styled straw man argument. This is a perfect match for the definition of trolling as described by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln: “creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community. … someone who purposely says something controversial in order to get a rise out of other users.” He didn’t like what said so he sought to create discord. Start a fight. Get a rise out of me. Why should I reward him by defending myself or retaliating? It’s far more responsible to bock the troll.

These are the boundaries I’ve set for myself to protect my mental health. I don’t expect anyone else to follow the same rules, but I would hope everyone has their own boundaries. It’s good for us. As my friend Jen frequently says, “I have healthy boundaries for my benefit and yours.”

Be prepared though, once you create guidelines for how you maintain your boundaries, not everyone will understand or appreciate them. In fact, some people will be offended. I could return to the kerfuffle over Kanye as an example. I had a private chat with the trolling stranger’s mutual friend later that evening when he asked about our interaction.

I have a different opinion. If you’re so angry at someone else’s opinion is that you have to dig through nearly a full years worth of random post to find something that you think contradicts their claim? That’s childish. You don't have to agree, but I'm gonna protect my neck.

You need it to get it: this writer’s struggle

For most struggling artists, the biggest dream they could dream is to make money doing what they love. Most of us yearn to turn our creative work into some form of income. The photographer who longs to book a celebrity session. The sculptor who wants to be hired for a commissioned piece of art. The painter who envisions their own creation as a mural along a busy street. The actress waiting for her big break The author who hopes to have their manuscript published.

Accomplishing any goal requires hustle and baby steps. Breakthrough artists are rare and overnight successes are rarer. Just like any other industry, creative pursuits require practice. Mastery is the result of years of trial, error, failure, rejection, and disappointment.

Some accomplishments are too complex to phrase in simple terms, especially when you have yet to reach them. Such admission is humbling for a writer like me - a person who regularly manipulates syntax and vocabulary to tell stories and communicate ideas. I am not immune to the challenges other artists face. Right now, my biggest hurdle is finding the one person who is willing to take a risk on me.

Eighteen years ago, Common released one of my all time favorite rap albums: Like Water for Chocolate. About halfway through, Mos Def joins Common for a track ‘The Questions.’ Lyrically, the two rappers trade back and forth, asking each other thought provoking questions and responding - usually something like “I don’t know you tell me.” The song is quirky and funky. Now, after nearly two decades, my current plight brings me back to one of Mos Def’s questions:

"Why do I need I.D. to get I.D.? If I had I.D. I wouldn't need I.D."

This one line is one of those odd truths about modern life. It doesn’t make sense but we accept it because that’s just the way it is. You need it to get it.

Which brings me back to today. As a struggling artist, an unpublished writer looking to transform my hustle into a career, I realize the I.D. Mos Def questioned could be replaced by other items.

I’m looking for opportunities to increase my income and it’s not an easy task. I have a steady day job - it’s not glamorous but I’m good at it. It pays the bills and provides medical benefits. My boss trusts me and there’s a couple hundred employees that rely on me. I don’t want to replace my income, just add to it. Between my skill set and lack of fancy degrees, writing is the most practical and logical method of earning more money. Considering the limited time I have outside my office, freelancing seems to be my only option. However, finding a paying gig is harder than you’d imagine.

Publishers looking for freelancers only want to hire writers with previous freelancing experience.

I could rewrite Mos Def’s lyrical musing: why do I need experience to get experience? If I had experience I wouldn’t need experience.

The J Jonah Jamesons of the world tend to ignore new faces. Whether they control the budgets and hiring decisions for websites, magazines, newspapers, or ad agencies, they want writers with proven track records. They would rather poach from a competitor than gamble on an underdog. This is a scary world for up and coming writers looking for their first step into professional bylines. Publishers want a sure bet. They don’t want talented writers, they want profitable writers. If you want to demonstrate your profitably, you must already be profitable.

Which is why you need experience to get experience.
You need publishing credits to get publishing credits.
You need a freelancing gig to get a freelancing gig.
You need name recognition to get name recognition.
You need a fan base to get a fan base.
You need an income to get an income.
You need I.D. to get I.D.

I do have a small army of fans: a few friends and family members who read everything I write. Their compliments motivate and encourage. However, I’m not a fan of nepotism and none of them work in print, web, or broadcast media. Their kind words are appreciated but don’t translate into dollar bills. If interpersonal encomium had monetary value, I’d be wealthy.

Unfortunately, I don’t have any answers for this phase in my creative journey. This isn’t a testimonial. This isn’t an “I can do it you can too” exhortation. Rather, it’s a call for solidarity. A beacon of hope - if you’re there, I am too.

You are not alone.

Mourning a Maverick

After the death of a celebrity, from athletes to musicians and movie stars, they're instantly remembered for the better parts of their nature. Their sins and errors are quickly forgotten - even if only temporarily, and their post-mortem image in the public consciousness is flattering and uplifting.

The same isn't always true of political giants. Either they go the way of dictators and tyrants, whose ends usually come violently and given unceremonious farewells like Gaddafi or Bin Laden. Others are honored, occasionally elevated to mythical status, a civic sainthood for American heroes. History books remember these figures with kindness and generosity not reserved for normal people. For these legends, temporary amnesia is far more permanent than what is granted for other departed and famous. We forget failures and weaknesses never to discuss them again. In generations to come, text books and memorials will only highlight the good they contributed to our world.

Senator John McCain falls into this latter category, an American icon whose name will be listed among the greats like George Washington, Susan B. Anthony, and Martin Luther King Jr. This isn't to say he was a perfect man, he was fully human. Rather, any dispute or critique is now irrelevant. Instead we're left with an immeasurable legacy. A military man, war hero, POW, and a figure who passionately devoted his life to the care of veterans. A lawmaker steadfast in his convictions yet was willing to work with individuals with opposing political beliefs to achieve shared goals. He was labeled a maverick because he would go his own way even when his party went a different direction. This balance of pragmatism and idealism ruffled a few feathers - especially among extremists.

image courtesy of Minnesota Public Radio

However, his approach created allies out of enemies and forged friends from nemeses. Most people would not handle competition with the grace McCain demonstrated. Instead of walking away bitter after devastating loss, McCain took the high road and celebrated his opponent's victory. He ran for president twice, losing to George W Bush and Barack Obama. These two men will be delivering eulogies at McCain’s funeral, a testament to the bonds McCain fought to build with his colleagues and rivals.

In death, McCain has silenced his critics and won the respect of his foes. While I could list the many ways I disagreed with his political stances or the policies he supported, my petty complaints don't matter. The life he lived was admirable and even in disagreements, I see a man who exemplifies the way I wish to be seen when my time comes. Despite our differences, I never doubted that he wanted what was best for his family, his state, and his nation. He was the last great American conservative and his absence will be felt for years to come. Regardless of political party or ideology, America needs more men and women like him.

Farewell Senator McCain. You lived well. May God rest your Maverick soul.

image courtesy of AP News