Month: September 2022

            Again, I must begin with an apology; last week was rather hectic for me, and in part due to last minute change in plans, I was unable to sit down to write a blog post.  Hopefully this will in part make up for that tardiness.

            As much as the title would indicate this post being about honesty, it really goes into my feelings in regard to a trait closely linked with it; respect. I don’t believe anyone could truly be dishonest with anyone they respected, or perhaps respect is more similar to a multi-story building, as opposed to something that is either there or not there. Perhaps respect and trust both include a number of different “shades,” in reference to the different degrees each holds. As an example, I could respect another’s ability to bluff while at the same time holding no respect for their own character. At least two examples come to mind when thinking on this subject, and both came at a great price.

            The first example that comes to mind relates to one of the worst experiences I had in college. After a falling out with someone I considered to be my closest friend at the time, we had managed to agree not to try to communicate with each other, but still do things such as a Poetry Slam that I was involved in. My interpretation of this was to give us each some time to reflect on what had happened with greater clarity. The agreement was made over text, which I would have had no problem with, had they done what I had thought and discussed it after a time of reflection. However, they clearly did not truly respect me, or else I would have received a different reaction other than a text saying that they were comfortable just “acknowledging each other, but otherwise going about our business” when I reached out to sit down and talk face to face.  I thought this was the end of the story, but years later I found out that they had tried to get me barred from participating in the Poetry Slam. My reaction upon hearing that?  I wanted to laugh.  Not because they had tried and failed to get me banned from something I had enjoyed doing, but rather because of how unnecessary it was. If they had just respected me enough to ask me not to audition for the Poetry Slam, I wouldn’t have gone to the audition. Out of respect for them? Not quite, but I suppose I was thinking with a broken heart rather than my head.

            The other personal example I can think of comes from something a little more recent.  At the time I was in a play and was developing a friendship with someone I had hoped to turn into something more. Not long before opening night, I had decided when I would ask her out, specifically after all performances of the play had concluded, as the show ended with us both onstage with our characters exchanging lines.  Through an event neither of us directly caused, someone else in the cast pointed out evidence they thought implied I had feelings for her.  We met at a restaurant afterwards to discuss how to proceed. She confessed she did have those feelings for me as well, but she was nervous because she didn’t want to “be the first one to break my heart” despite my telling her that ship had sailed long ago. So we agreed to remain friends and see if a relationship blossomed out of it. What does this have to do with honesty?  She failed to tell me that she was at least seven years into a relationship that started when she was in high school. Not telling me a detail such as that still categorized it as a lie, even if it was a lie of omission.

            In all fairness, I might have told a lie in each scenario previously described. For the first, I wanted to surprise the person in question in their viewing of a prior Poetry Slam by composing a poem where I wrote (or more accurately spoke) in a fashion in which I believed only they or I would know who I was talking about. I was a coward for that, I freely admit, and I paid a great price for that sin.  In the second example which I spoke of, perhaps I was a coward, though to a lesser degree.  At an event we were both at, I had asked her if she wanted to get coffee sometime, as most media has convinced me that is a pre-dating ritual that had to happen in adults.  I’ll not go into specifics, but it she went back to confirm that she said “I’d love to” when I asked this. Not wishing to cause her distress, I lied and replied: “that’s what I heard.” I don’t know what would have happened if I had been honest and said I heard no “d” and a word rhyming with “to,” but it really doesn’t matter. We are all the sum of our choices in life, and as painful as it is, I’ve learned living in truth is preferable to pleasant lies.

            Maybe it’s due to the fact that last Monday I spent time with my sister-in-law’s family, but I felt inclined to make that very thing the subject of today’s post; family, or more accurately, what specifically constitutes that construct.  Over the course of my life, I’ve interacted with a variety of people who had different family structures, in addition to consuming different media both with a wide array of that same concept. While I first heard the line that inspired the title, it was set in a fictious world, however that does not diminish from the truth behind that quote.

            For the curious amongst the readers that quote is from the television series Supernatural, which lasted far longer than the stars themselves originally thought. The show follows two brothers but weaved around the theme of family, with plot points involving their father on some occasions, their mother on others, but the show itself built up a theme of chosen family; those not related to them, but who stood by them through thick and thin. One such member of this chosen family uttered the first half of the title.  As the writers explored more dynamics, they introduced a relative who shared the same goal as the brothers but went about it in the wrong way, viewing those around him, including his biological relatives, as pawns rather than as equals. This is just one example of the silver screen using the trope of family, but in my opinion, one of the best, because it wasn’t the basic “blood is thicker than water” cliché, rather it explored several different viewpoints on the subject of family.

            There is a term in Jewish communities called Machatunium, which refers to one’s parents as well of the parents of one’s spouse.  I looked up this term specifically for this post, as at a cookout held at the house of an uncle of my brother’s spouse, his mother-in-law referred to me using this term, and explained through that, we were family, to which I have two disagreements, number one being that as those of you who have read my previous post on church can attest to, I am not Jewish. The second of these two being that my brother is fond of pointing out that Judaism is “the religion of lawyers,” meaning that there are so many technicalities to be argued that it seems like the perfect religion for someone of that profession. How does this relate to the point that I do not fit the definition of Machatunium? Quite simply because I have yet to meet a lawyer yet who has been able to successfully argue that I am the parent of either my brother or his spouse, though in all fairness I have consulted no rabbi before reaching this conclusion.

            In truth, I think Supernatural hit the nail on the head when the show went into chosen family. Personally, my chosen family resides in my friends both from college and from organizations I have volunteered with. Shared experiences can also contribute to one’s criteria of chosen family. The accident I mentioned in my last post placed me in a program for others with remarkable stories of how they beat the odds and recovered from seemingly impossible circumstances. Though most of us haven’t seen each other in years, I still consider them family. I have even found family in visiting friends, meaning that I became close enough with their family that in a sense I was adopted into it. So look around you. You might just have more family around you than you think.

            And apologies about missing the post last week, ironically enough I was traveling to visit some of my own family and didn’t want to take away from the weekend by stepping out to write a blog post.

Forgive me, for I shall be using at least two examples from a fictional universe mentioned in the very last post on this website.  For this week’s post, I had been thinking a lot about my own…limitations, and how similar medical conditions are portrayed in media. Going further than that, how entertainment is evolving to give those afflicted with these medical conditions a greater voice within the industry.

The thought to have this topic came to me as I was watching a movie this past weekend, one of the newer Star Wars movies, perhaps in anticipation for the release of a series based off a character from that one film. It occurred to me when I saw the entrance of a blind character that the entire franchise never really included a disabled character, although in a universe with technology that advised it could be considered difficult not to propose solving the issue in that way. From a story-telling perspective, this character was playing into the ‘blind monk’ trope, yet what bothered me was how cliché it seemed that the physical blindness was compensated with a heightened sense of hearing. While it was comforting to see Hollywood showing someone with this sort of condition, it was still a recycled version of a stereotype, even if it was the first time the series was using it.

The other example from the Star Wars universe I felt needed referencing comes not from the storyline of any series, rather one of the actors used in a series. Actor Troy Kotsur was cast in the series The Mandalorian as one of several cloaked beings known as Tuskens who spoke mainly in grunts and screams, and up until then had never attempted to be communicated with. Kotsur, who is deaf himself, helped develop a sign language within the universe that communicated with other beings. This is why it matters for those with disabilities to be part of the conversation, not just be admired by those leading it. Additionally, Kotsur won an Oscar for his performance in CODA, becoming the first deaf male actor to win such an award.

Perhaps my personal favorite on this list is the impact actress Millicent Simmonds had working on the movie A Quiet Place. Director John Krazinski fought for a deaf actress to be cast in the role that Simmonds ultimately played, specifically because the role itself was playing a deaf child. Moreover, Krazinski required the whole cast to learn American Sign Language so that they knew what signs to make when they had to use ASL for their part, but more importantly so that they could communicate with their castmate in a way that she could easily understand. He even took the input of both Simmonds and her family when filming the movie. Again, that is what society needs; not just bobbing heads when those less than able-bodied say what they need, but rather be given a say in the actual process; building a system they fit into rather than have a support system made by those who could never understand what it’s like living with those types of conditions.

The final actress that deserves to be discussed within this post is Jamie Brewer, most notable for her work in the American Horror Stories series. In 2015, the actress became the first person with Down Syndrome to walk the runway in New York Fashion Week. Three years later, she also became the first person living with that condition to win the Drama Desk award for Outstanding Featured Actress in a Play. They did not create a separate category for her, put rather put her in the same category as every neurotypical actress in the academy. Again, that is all that can be asked; to be treated as an equal to every other person with the same profession.

Forgive me if parts of this post seemed arrogant, I just can’t stand when I feel like others are trying to place me on some kind of pedestal just for living my life with ‘fun’ leftovers of a car accident and a traumatic brain injury. There are those in the world who have built themselves as voices of others living with the same medical or mental conditions as them, however, simply having that condition does not mean they need to become a model for that specific condition. We are just playing the hand that life dealt to us, nothing more, and we have as much right to privacy as anyone else. So what’s the end message to all this? How does the public know who to look up to as a role model and who to allow to blend into the background? Listen to the wishes of that person, and then follow those wishes. Yes, it’s that simple.