There are two things that I would like to do but simply cannot afford to at this time.
One is solar panels. This is not solely specific to the megaquake. My initial interest in it is due to environmental concerns and energy independence. I mention it in conjunction with the megaquake because even if the power grid goes down, you could still have power.
That assumes that the earthquake does not damage the panels, so there is a risk there. Also, you do need to install something like a battery backup, but that is something that has been used successfully by solar panel owners during power outages caused by weather.
Not only would it be beneficial for you to maintain power for yourself, but there is this image that stays with me from Hurricane Sandy, and a gate with an power strip on an extension cord and a sign, "We have power. Please feel free to charge your phone."
http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/cellphone-charging-new-york-620x465.jpeg
I think about that not just for the convenience of phones, but also for medications that need refrigeration, or electrical medical devices. If there are pockets of power while the grid is being repaired, that can do a lot of good.
The other thing I really want, and this is very earthquake specific, is getting the house bolted to the foundation. If you live in the Pacific Northwest and your home was built after 1978, this should already have been done. There are a lot of houses still in use that were built before then. My entire block and most of the nearby houses fall into that category.
For the structural recommendations that they make, a lot of them end up getting made with regular maintenance. Your water heater gets replaced every twelve years or so, and now it should be raised and strapped into place automatically. Roofs last longer, but if you have a house from before 1978, odds are good that the roof has been replaced at least once, and when mine was the chimney was reinforced. Bolting the house to the foundation doesn't neatly fold in with any other maintenance - it's something you just have to decide to do and do it.
(The other thing that is often mentioned is bracing the cripple wall, which would make sense to do at the same time as the bolting.)
Unfortunately, the basic quote that I got for bolting the house comes in at around $4000. (I could probably get it done for $3800.) I do not have that kind of money available.
I have to admit that looking at the instructions for doing so, it does seem like a project with strong do-it-yourself potential if you have any ability at all in that direction. I don't really, but there are people who do.
You can do some preliminary reading at http://www.earthquakesafety.com/earthquake-retrofitting.html, but I also recommend Living With Earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest by Robert S Yeats. In addition to talking about bolting and structural reinforcements there is also practical information on non-structural improvements, like cabinet latches and shelving paper.
In the meantime, as so much of the past few weeks has focused on working together, it does make me wonder if there are ways neighborhoods could come together and get collective deals on panel installation or retrofitting. Maybe a few people with home improvement know-how could combine with neighbors who know less but are still willing to help, and make an entire neighborhood stronger.
Not all pockets of power have to be electrical in nature.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Cascadia Megaquake - Making things happen
I know a lot of people found "Unprepared" sobering, and that's fair, but I also found many reasons to be optimistic.
First of all I did not know that it was possible to fight liquefaction. I had never seen compaction grout before. Now I not only know it exists, but that it helped the Sendai airport. I did know that the Portland airport is in the liquefaction zone, so knowing there are options there is huge. Retrofitting at least a few runways would be a major boon if you want to be able to receive relief supplies.
Obviously it's not the only thing; if you can get the planes to land, but then don't have options to get trucks in or out, it's limited usefulness, but technology has found some amazing solutions. Seeing the hospital foundation built on springs, my first thought was that it didn't seem practical, but watching the side by side videos of how the building withstands the quake, that is amazing. There are options out there. Of course there is a problem with getting people to pay for it.
This is the other side of reaching out that I mentioned last week. There are a lot of things that can be done if popular support and political will can be mustered.
Not everything is huge. Through teachers and parents at Sunnyside school they have made some good strides. Retrofitting a building is expensive, but installing straps on cabinets to keep them from falling over and latches on the doors to keep items from falling out is much less expensive, and that will save lives. Getting the emergency buckets in each room, including class lists, and drilling the staff and students regularly, not only increases safety but will increase calm and a feeling of organization. Any parent teacher coalition should be able to take similar measures.
If that is all that is done, you should have a school where people are able to survive, and be ready for what comes after. The school may not be usable without massive repairs, which goes into recovery time. That requires a broader effort.
One of the communities covered was Seaside, where three out of four schools are in the tsunami zone. A proposal that seemed to have broad support ended up being defeated in an election, possibly because many of the home owners there are non-residents with vacation and rental properties. Perhaps that requires an outreach through the rental associations. Perhaps it requires applying for federal grants to secure funding that way.
My biggest concern that I had not previously considered is the Oregon Fuel Depot on the Willamette. There are old tanks full of fossil fuels in the liquefaction zone and right next to water, and it is the sole fuel location for the area. That means we are looking at twin catastrophes of a loss of fuel that will be vitally necessary and massive environmental contamination in an area that will already be under siege. Again, there is retrofitting that can be done, and could help so much. There is just not the will to do it.
This could be a good place to exert pressure. Whether that means writing to the companies and asking them to take measures, or writing to the government and getting them to exert pressure, I am not sure what will be most effective, but something needs to be done.
Companies can be encouraged to retrofit via tax incentives (though those should be written carefully to ensure that the work is actually done and done quickly). Local economies can be stimulated through construction projects. There are options here, but people need to get on it. A lot of people are, but sometimes it feels like it is just the geologists. We need more.
Here is one thought. Various areas flood regularly, including Tillamook. I had heard that this would frequently result in a loss of cows, until elevated stands were built, and the cows will go up and escape the flood waters.
I know that people take recurring losses of assets more seriously than future potential losses, so I understand the difference, but there is another lesson there. If you give cows a way to save themselves they will do it. Humans should be able to figure it out.
First of all I did not know that it was possible to fight liquefaction. I had never seen compaction grout before. Now I not only know it exists, but that it helped the Sendai airport. I did know that the Portland airport is in the liquefaction zone, so knowing there are options there is huge. Retrofitting at least a few runways would be a major boon if you want to be able to receive relief supplies.
Obviously it's not the only thing; if you can get the planes to land, but then don't have options to get trucks in or out, it's limited usefulness, but technology has found some amazing solutions. Seeing the hospital foundation built on springs, my first thought was that it didn't seem practical, but watching the side by side videos of how the building withstands the quake, that is amazing. There are options out there. Of course there is a problem with getting people to pay for it.
This is the other side of reaching out that I mentioned last week. There are a lot of things that can be done if popular support and political will can be mustered.
Not everything is huge. Through teachers and parents at Sunnyside school they have made some good strides. Retrofitting a building is expensive, but installing straps on cabinets to keep them from falling over and latches on the doors to keep items from falling out is much less expensive, and that will save lives. Getting the emergency buckets in each room, including class lists, and drilling the staff and students regularly, not only increases safety but will increase calm and a feeling of organization. Any parent teacher coalition should be able to take similar measures.
If that is all that is done, you should have a school where people are able to survive, and be ready for what comes after. The school may not be usable without massive repairs, which goes into recovery time. That requires a broader effort.
One of the communities covered was Seaside, where three out of four schools are in the tsunami zone. A proposal that seemed to have broad support ended up being defeated in an election, possibly because many of the home owners there are non-residents with vacation and rental properties. Perhaps that requires an outreach through the rental associations. Perhaps it requires applying for federal grants to secure funding that way.
My biggest concern that I had not previously considered is the Oregon Fuel Depot on the Willamette. There are old tanks full of fossil fuels in the liquefaction zone and right next to water, and it is the sole fuel location for the area. That means we are looking at twin catastrophes of a loss of fuel that will be vitally necessary and massive environmental contamination in an area that will already be under siege. Again, there is retrofitting that can be done, and could help so much. There is just not the will to do it.
This could be a good place to exert pressure. Whether that means writing to the companies and asking them to take measures, or writing to the government and getting them to exert pressure, I am not sure what will be most effective, but something needs to be done.
Companies can be encouraged to retrofit via tax incentives (though those should be written carefully to ensure that the work is actually done and done quickly). Local economies can be stimulated through construction projects. There are options here, but people need to get on it. A lot of people are, but sometimes it feels like it is just the geologists. We need more.
Here is one thought. Various areas flood regularly, including Tillamook. I had heard that this would frequently result in a loss of cows, until elevated stands were built, and the cows will go up and escape the flood waters.
I know that people take recurring losses of assets more seriously than future potential losses, so I understand the difference, but there is another lesson there. If you give cows a way to save themselves they will do it. Humans should be able to figure it out.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Cascadia Megaquake - Asking around
This goes back to the previous round of writing. If you will recall, I said I had written to the emergency manager for my work to ask about our contingency plans, but also that there were other places I wanted to write. I did that.
This is in keeping with the realization that personal preparedness - while very important - is insufficient for the region. Thinking about what would be needed for recovery, I was primarily focusing on what would be needed to keep the workforce functioning so we could avoid the economic collapse predicted by The New Yorker.
What do businesses need? They need electricity, obviously, and that led to utilities in general. It may be more obvious that no one in the building can work without electricity, but if you have power without water, there are hygiene issues with opening the building. If you have power but no heat, because the heat is gas, that may be a health risk, depending on the time of year. That was a good reason to check with PGE, NW Natural Gas, and Tualatin Valley Water District. I know there are other utility companies in the region, but these are the companies my household writes checks to, so I wrote to them.
There were two other things that came to mind where I did not write. One is internet. Yes, electricity will get the computers turned on, but so much of what they do now is web-based that connectivity is huge. I could still write to Comcast and ask for the sake of my household, but I was focusing on business needs, and I don't know enough about what companies they are likely to use, and if there are ways in which the connections are different. It's worth looking into.
The other message I didn't write was to the garbage company, because it felt like a big part of their ability to function would depend on the roads. I wrote to ODOT instead. Then, because that got me into government, I decided to check in with Metro, because their whole thing is getting different parts of the region to function together, so they could be very helpful in getting regional preparedness going.
Most of the answers were very positive.
Metro
Metro does coordinate with local and state governments and emergency preparedness agencies to plan for disaster relief efforts. We are a member of the Regional Disaster Preparedness Organization and have been working on a disaster debris plan for many years. We are also involved in the Cascadia Rising earthquake simulation exercise in June 2016 which will test the coordination and emergency response efforts of many organizations.
Tualatin Valley Water District
They were my favorite. Not only are they partnering with Hillsboro to develop a third water supply for backup, obtaining portable distribution systems, strengthening infrastructure and participating in drills, but when I wrote they were working on an article to send to their customers to keep them informed. That is what I call doing everything right. You can read more about some of their work at
ODOT
Also a favorite. They are also participating in drills and planning, working with their employees on individual preparedness so that their workforce will be ready, and thinking strategically with locating supplies where they will have access regardless of transportation issues. One thing they pointed out is that with a lot of their normal responses to landslides and storms, they are dealing with similar situations to what an earthquake will create. They are also looking at getting the infrastructure more earthquake ready.
NW Natural Gas
They were my least favorite. They kept returning to their personal preparedness information, and then to what to do during an earthquake, when I was specifically asking about recovery. Eventually they said that they could not predict recovery time without knowing how big it ended up being, but forecasting is how you prepare. I do appreciate that they have procedures in place for keeping everything from burning up, because that is important, and fires would make recovery worse, but the final answer and the process for getting it were both frustrating.
PGE
Actually, the automated form did not understand my question. I should have followed up and called, but since at that time I knew I was going to wait for "Unprepared" to start writing about earthquakes again, I put that on hold.
Are we perfect regionally? No, but we knew that. What the article missed is that there are people working on it, and they can do some pretty impressive things. If everyone works on it, we have a pretty good shot.
These questions are good for finding out information, but to get everyone working together on preparedness, it may also take some reaching out to exert pressure. More on that next week.
This is in keeping with the realization that personal preparedness - while very important - is insufficient for the region. Thinking about what would be needed for recovery, I was primarily focusing on what would be needed to keep the workforce functioning so we could avoid the economic collapse predicted by The New Yorker.
What do businesses need? They need electricity, obviously, and that led to utilities in general. It may be more obvious that no one in the building can work without electricity, but if you have power without water, there are hygiene issues with opening the building. If you have power but no heat, because the heat is gas, that may be a health risk, depending on the time of year. That was a good reason to check with PGE, NW Natural Gas, and Tualatin Valley Water District. I know there are other utility companies in the region, but these are the companies my household writes checks to, so I wrote to them.
There were two other things that came to mind where I did not write. One is internet. Yes, electricity will get the computers turned on, but so much of what they do now is web-based that connectivity is huge. I could still write to Comcast and ask for the sake of my household, but I was focusing on business needs, and I don't know enough about what companies they are likely to use, and if there are ways in which the connections are different. It's worth looking into.
The other message I didn't write was to the garbage company, because it felt like a big part of their ability to function would depend on the roads. I wrote to ODOT instead. Then, because that got me into government, I decided to check in with Metro, because their whole thing is getting different parts of the region to function together, so they could be very helpful in getting regional preparedness going.
Most of the answers were very positive.
Metro
Metro does coordinate with local and state governments and emergency preparedness agencies to plan for disaster relief efforts. We are a member of the Regional Disaster Preparedness Organization and have been working on a disaster debris plan for many years. We are also involved in the Cascadia Rising earthquake simulation exercise in June 2016 which will test the coordination and emergency response efforts of many organizations.
Tualatin Valley Water District
They were my favorite. Not only are they partnering with Hillsboro to develop a third water supply for backup, obtaining portable distribution systems, strengthening infrastructure and participating in drills, but when I wrote they were working on an article to send to their customers to keep them informed. That is what I call doing everything right. You can read more about some of their work at
www.OurReliableWater.org.
ODOT
Also a favorite. They are also participating in drills and planning, working with their employees on individual preparedness so that their workforce will be ready, and thinking strategically with locating supplies where they will have access regardless of transportation issues. One thing they pointed out is that with a lot of their normal responses to landslides and storms, they are dealing with similar situations to what an earthquake will create. They are also looking at getting the infrastructure more earthquake ready.
NW Natural Gas
They were my least favorite. They kept returning to their personal preparedness information, and then to what to do during an earthquake, when I was specifically asking about recovery. Eventually they said that they could not predict recovery time without knowing how big it ended up being, but forecasting is how you prepare. I do appreciate that they have procedures in place for keeping everything from burning up, because that is important, and fires would make recovery worse, but the final answer and the process for getting it were both frustrating.
PGE
Actually, the automated form did not understand my question. I should have followed up and called, but since at that time I knew I was going to wait for "Unprepared" to start writing about earthquakes again, I put that on hold.
Are we perfect regionally? No, but we knew that. What the article missed is that there are people working on it, and they can do some pretty impressive things. If everyone works on it, we have a pretty good shot.
These questions are good for finding out information, but to get everyone working together on preparedness, it may also take some reaching out to exert pressure. More on that next week.
Sunday, October 4, 2015
Togetherness
I said last week that we would get back to earthquakes this week, but I suspect that the majority of my readers for this blog are LDS, and thus focusing on Conference this weekend. It has certainly affected my schedule. So, here is a thought via Conference and building on some of my recent reading that will lead us nicely into the earthquake section.
When they keep going back and forth between Oregon and Japan in "Unprepared", it is not just to show us how devastating an earthquake and tsunami can be (though it can be pretty effective for that) but also to show us the benefits of preparing in advance. There is a lot of mitigation that can be done.
I was talking with a friend Thursday night after watching part of the special about how much can be done, and she pointed out how a lot of the things that could have been done already and were suggested are not being done because no one wants to pay for it. Yes, lots of areas are cash-strapped, but there is also an issue with our rugged individualistic history of not wanting to give anyone else handouts, even if it is something that would be better for society.
I am also currently reading The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better, by Richard G. Williamson and Kate Pickett. The book goes through various studies and shows that for pretty much all measurements of quality of life and social ills, the societies that are more equal have it better across the board. In a country with high inequality the rich are healthier than the poor, and the poor in the more equal society have a higher level of benefit than the rich, but even the rich in the more equal society do better.
That shouldn't be at all surprising, really, and I am sure I will get back to it, but it makes it very unsurprising to find that Japan is one of the most equal societies, and also the one that is so capable of doing advance preparations for earthquakes that not only save lives during the earthquake but improve things after. They're not perfect, but when our megaquake comes we are going to want their level of preparation.
My thought from conference is that when we worry about temptation and corruption, we tend to think about sexual sin and Word of Wisdom issues, and probably most of us are past that. Things happen, but if you are a stable adult who has been living the Word of Wisdom and Law of Chastity for life, chances are good that you we be able to keep that up. There are strong components of habit for them, and to get where they are real temptations several other things would probably have to happen first.
This may not be true for your teenage children, but helping them build a relationship with God and understand the values of those laws will be more beneficial for them than limiting their contact with non-members, which is often a temptation.
That's the temptation I want to get to. There are commandments that focus on purity, and they are important, but we should be easily able to see when we are breaking them.
There are more commandments that focus on charity, and there are many scriptures reminding us how important it is, but letting our hearts get hard is easy to miss. Just the process of hardening makes us less sensitive, and the more we shut ourselves off from anyone different from us, the less opportunities we have to feel out the boundaries of our hearts.
So when the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats focuses on the service we give, including to people in prison who might reasonably be considered "undesirable", and when invited guests are not ready for the bridegroom because they lack oil, I feel it is more likely to be a problem of hard hearts.
I am especially concerned with that now because of the presidential election (something else I am sure I will get back to). A movie I saw recently showed me something of the unexpected reach of rhetoric. We have already seen attacks on real human beings inspired by Trump. He is the most blatant in his hatred, but many of the other candidates still focus on all of the other people who are problems, dividing it into "us" and "them".
This is not the way of the Gospel, and it is not the way into a better society, not the way into a more prepared one.
Yes, the earthquake section will show a specific need for the people of the Pacific Northwest to come together, but there is a need for togetherness that goes further than that, and deeper, and pursuing it can helps us develop our most essential spiritual quality.
That's something to think about. Then, when you are ready to apply that to Cascadia, look here:
http://www.opb.org/news/series/unprepared/
When they keep going back and forth between Oregon and Japan in "Unprepared", it is not just to show us how devastating an earthquake and tsunami can be (though it can be pretty effective for that) but also to show us the benefits of preparing in advance. There is a lot of mitigation that can be done.
I was talking with a friend Thursday night after watching part of the special about how much can be done, and she pointed out how a lot of the things that could have been done already and were suggested are not being done because no one wants to pay for it. Yes, lots of areas are cash-strapped, but there is also an issue with our rugged individualistic history of not wanting to give anyone else handouts, even if it is something that would be better for society.
I am also currently reading The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better, by Richard G. Williamson and Kate Pickett. The book goes through various studies and shows that for pretty much all measurements of quality of life and social ills, the societies that are more equal have it better across the board. In a country with high inequality the rich are healthier than the poor, and the poor in the more equal society have a higher level of benefit than the rich, but even the rich in the more equal society do better.
That shouldn't be at all surprising, really, and I am sure I will get back to it, but it makes it very unsurprising to find that Japan is one of the most equal societies, and also the one that is so capable of doing advance preparations for earthquakes that not only save lives during the earthquake but improve things after. They're not perfect, but when our megaquake comes we are going to want their level of preparation.
My thought from conference is that when we worry about temptation and corruption, we tend to think about sexual sin and Word of Wisdom issues, and probably most of us are past that. Things happen, but if you are a stable adult who has been living the Word of Wisdom and Law of Chastity for life, chances are good that you we be able to keep that up. There are strong components of habit for them, and to get where they are real temptations several other things would probably have to happen first.
This may not be true for your teenage children, but helping them build a relationship with God and understand the values of those laws will be more beneficial for them than limiting their contact with non-members, which is often a temptation.
That's the temptation I want to get to. There are commandments that focus on purity, and they are important, but we should be easily able to see when we are breaking them.
There are more commandments that focus on charity, and there are many scriptures reminding us how important it is, but letting our hearts get hard is easy to miss. Just the process of hardening makes us less sensitive, and the more we shut ourselves off from anyone different from us, the less opportunities we have to feel out the boundaries of our hearts.
So when the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats focuses on the service we give, including to people in prison who might reasonably be considered "undesirable", and when invited guests are not ready for the bridegroom because they lack oil, I feel it is more likely to be a problem of hard hearts.
I am especially concerned with that now because of the presidential election (something else I am sure I will get back to). A movie I saw recently showed me something of the unexpected reach of rhetoric. We have already seen attacks on real human beings inspired by Trump. He is the most blatant in his hatred, but many of the other candidates still focus on all of the other people who are problems, dividing it into "us" and "them".
This is not the way of the Gospel, and it is not the way into a better society, not the way into a more prepared one.
Yes, the earthquake section will show a specific need for the people of the Pacific Northwest to come together, but there is a need for togetherness that goes further than that, and deeper, and pursuing it can helps us develop our most essential spiritual quality.
That's something to think about. Then, when you are ready to apply that to Cascadia, look here:
http://www.opb.org/news/series/unprepared/
Sunday, September 27, 2015
Breast Implants
Recently there was an article examining "the modern dating crisis" by examining Mormons and Orthodox Jews:
http://time.com/dateonomics/
It did have some interesting information, though the research didn't feel intellectually vigorous. At least for me, part of that is knowing that a large part of the breast implant market in Utah consists of married women. I'm not sure that's so much about dating.
The premise of the article is that because men outnumber women in the dating pools of these religious groups, thus having more options, this puts extra pressure on the women to increase their desirability. There is pressure on the physical appearance of the Orthodox Jewish women too, but there has also been a huge increase in the use of dowries, and their relative value. Apparently in Mormon culture there is only the focus on appearance, hence breast implants.
The article mentions at least one patient who is getting implants because her boyfriend would like them bigger (also, the plastic surgeon mentioned sees a lot of college age women coming in for Botox injections), so it's not that unmarried woman are not affected. Still, there are a lot of housewives getting the procedure too.
That is probably not completely unrelated. The ads are there for everyone to see, so even if they are geared toward one demographic, they could affect another.
There is a very interesting article on the topic at http://www.beautyredefined.net/mirror-mirror-on-the-wall-salt-lake-city-is-vainest-of-them-all/, which lets us know - among other things - that Salt Lake City earned the title "Vainest City in the Nation" in 2007, based on an index of plastic surgeons per capita and spending on beauty products.
Vanity is not a Young Women value. It's not a Gospel value. It should not be something we want any of our women to aspire to. But if we tell them that they have to be attractive, and then our messages that are purportedly about other things - like modesty - still focus on the appearance of the girls, that is a likely result.
Then, if they succeed too well in being attractive, it becomes so easy to modesty-shame them.
- "That top is too tight."
- "It wasn't before the implants."
Initially my concerns with the modesty shaming was that it can alienate people who may forget that the Church is true if they find enough members being jerks. That is a concern, but even without that, this seems like a concept destined to make women neurotic and keep them from discovering their true potential.
I'd call it manure, but manure can at least produce good results. This is toxic.
I'm do have some thoughts about how focusing on service and charity, gratitude, and developing your own talents while appreciating the talents of others would do a lot more to foster true modesty anyway, but these attitudes aren't about modesty anyway. They are about keeping women down, and modesty-shaming allows women to also have a position above someone else. When your heart is right, there probably are some clothes you won't wear, but you're not going to care a lot about what other people are wearing.
That's all I have to say on this for now. Oregon Field Guide's "Unprepared" airs October 1st at 8 PM on OPB. You can watch it online too. Check it out, and then we will go back to talking about earthquakes.
(Actually, not just earthquakes; megaquakes. In fact, the megaquake. Yeah, be ready for that.)
http://time.com/dateonomics/
It did have some interesting information, though the research didn't feel intellectually vigorous. At least for me, part of that is knowing that a large part of the breast implant market in Utah consists of married women. I'm not sure that's so much about dating.
The premise of the article is that because men outnumber women in the dating pools of these religious groups, thus having more options, this puts extra pressure on the women to increase their desirability. There is pressure on the physical appearance of the Orthodox Jewish women too, but there has also been a huge increase in the use of dowries, and their relative value. Apparently in Mormon culture there is only the focus on appearance, hence breast implants.
The article mentions at least one patient who is getting implants because her boyfriend would like them bigger (also, the plastic surgeon mentioned sees a lot of college age women coming in for Botox injections), so it's not that unmarried woman are not affected. Still, there are a lot of housewives getting the procedure too.
That is probably not completely unrelated. The ads are there for everyone to see, so even if they are geared toward one demographic, they could affect another.
There is a very interesting article on the topic at http://www.beautyredefined.net/mirror-mirror-on-the-wall-salt-lake-city-is-vainest-of-them-all/, which lets us know - among other things - that Salt Lake City earned the title "Vainest City in the Nation" in 2007, based on an index of plastic surgeons per capita and spending on beauty products.
Vanity is not a Young Women value. It's not a Gospel value. It should not be something we want any of our women to aspire to. But if we tell them that they have to be attractive, and then our messages that are purportedly about other things - like modesty - still focus on the appearance of the girls, that is a likely result.
Then, if they succeed too well in being attractive, it becomes so easy to modesty-shame them.
- "That top is too tight."
- "It wasn't before the implants."
Initially my concerns with the modesty shaming was that it can alienate people who may forget that the Church is true if they find enough members being jerks. That is a concern, but even without that, this seems like a concept destined to make women neurotic and keep them from discovering their true potential.
I'd call it manure, but manure can at least produce good results. This is toxic.
I'm do have some thoughts about how focusing on service and charity, gratitude, and developing your own talents while appreciating the talents of others would do a lot more to foster true modesty anyway, but these attitudes aren't about modesty anyway. They are about keeping women down, and modesty-shaming allows women to also have a position above someone else. When your heart is right, there probably are some clothes you won't wear, but you're not going to care a lot about what other people are wearing.
That's all I have to say on this for now. Oregon Field Guide's "Unprepared" airs October 1st at 8 PM on OPB. You can watch it online too. Check it out, and then we will go back to talking about earthquakes.
(Actually, not just earthquakes; megaquakes. In fact, the megaquake. Yeah, be ready for that.)
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Tradition
When I was around third grade a Pakistani family moved in next door. They were the first Muslims I had ever met.
The mother was not allowed to show her legs because of modesty. The oldest daughter was getting close to where she would be of an age to think about that (I believe it was 12). As her mother was American, and not Muslim, I was not sure that she would adhere. There was some potential for friction there, and eventually she started visiting her father less, though that was not necessarily the cause.
We met three other Pakistani families through them, and they all followed the same rules for modesty, focusing on adult women having their legs covered.
My religion believed in modesty too, so I related to that. Their rule was stricter than ours, because Mormon women can wear shorts, but in terms of modesty in dress being important, more emphasis on it approaching adulthood, and a higher burden on women than on men, it was pretty similar.
Years later seeing hijab, niqab, and burqas, it looked like Pakistani women had gotten off easy, but I have seen Pakistani women wearing head coverings as well. Perhaps it is different if you are rural or urban. There were also times when clothing rules changed drastically in Iran and Afghanistan, based in changes in power.
I concluded that often rules of modesty might be based more on tradition than religious doctrine. That would not be at all surprising. Local climate influences dress, and availability of materials, and habits can be strong.
I don't want to sound disrespectful at all in my writing. One young friend recently defended hijab - which she wears - as a way of keeping people from judging you by your looks so they will focus on your mind instead. There is value in that. People do focus on looks too much.
I can see her point, but I also remember Marji making fun of the sexuality that radiates from a woman's hair in Persepolis, and that with hijab people can still judge your face (which does look better framed by hair), and that people are free to judge her father on his looks since he does not have to wear it.
Modesty is a good trait, and so many good things can be said about it. There is also a lot to be said for not making everything sexual, or having women compete to attract, or for reducing women to their very dangerous looks. I am afraid though that much of what we do in the name of modesty flies specifically counter to that.
And now I am talking about Mormons again, but more on that next week.
The mother was not allowed to show her legs because of modesty. The oldest daughter was getting close to where she would be of an age to think about that (I believe it was 12). As her mother was American, and not Muslim, I was not sure that she would adhere. There was some potential for friction there, and eventually she started visiting her father less, though that was not necessarily the cause.
We met three other Pakistani families through them, and they all followed the same rules for modesty, focusing on adult women having their legs covered.
My religion believed in modesty too, so I related to that. Their rule was stricter than ours, because Mormon women can wear shorts, but in terms of modesty in dress being important, more emphasis on it approaching adulthood, and a higher burden on women than on men, it was pretty similar.
Years later seeing hijab, niqab, and burqas, it looked like Pakistani women had gotten off easy, but I have seen Pakistani women wearing head coverings as well. Perhaps it is different if you are rural or urban. There were also times when clothing rules changed drastically in Iran and Afghanistan, based in changes in power.
I concluded that often rules of modesty might be based more on tradition than religious doctrine. That would not be at all surprising. Local climate influences dress, and availability of materials, and habits can be strong.
I don't want to sound disrespectful at all in my writing. One young friend recently defended hijab - which she wears - as a way of keeping people from judging you by your looks so they will focus on your mind instead. There is value in that. People do focus on looks too much.
I can see her point, but I also remember Marji making fun of the sexuality that radiates from a woman's hair in Persepolis, and that with hijab people can still judge your face (which does look better framed by hair), and that people are free to judge her father on his looks since he does not have to wear it.
Modesty is a good trait, and so many good things can be said about it. There is also a lot to be said for not making everything sexual, or having women compete to attract, or for reducing women to their very dangerous looks. I am afraid though that much of what we do in the name of modesty flies specifically counter to that.
And now I am talking about Mormons again, but more on that next week.
Sunday, September 13, 2015
False modesty
I have been getting very irritated with talk of "modesty" lately. Let me start with a little story:
http://www.screendaily.com/festivals/cannes/women-denied-palais-entry-for-wearing-flats/5088395.article?referrer=RSS
This may seem like it has nothing to do with modesty, but the element of inspection reminded me of another story I had recently heard of women back in the day having to kneel to demonstrate that their skirts were long enough, based on whether their hems touched the floor or not.
Allow me to suggest that if that is necessary to tell if the skirt is long enough, it's long enough.
The common factor is that the female body is subject to inspection. Once that is expected, the criteria can become increasingly arbitrary and ridiculous. A heel does not automatically make a shoe beautiful - some heels are really tacky. Many shoes are hidden by the gown length anyway. (I believe I read something about some women being asked to raise their skirts slightly so the heels could be checked.)
Therefore you can decide that even if a girl's collarbone is currently covered, the possibility of the sweater that is covering the collarbone being removed is reason enough to decide that the shirt is still inappropriate enough to send her home.
This teaches our young women two things: their bodies are shameful things and they are not capable of making their own decisions on what is appropriate. Because the reasons their bodies must be hidden are so frequently centered around distractions for the boys, girls are also taught that it is not about them. Even something as basic as what she puts on in the morning is not about her. Finally, though clearly the problem is how easily distracted and low-minded boys are, it is the responsibility of the girls to fix it.
Sadly, she is still required to be attractive, but not attractive in a way that violates the prevailing ill-conceived rules about what is and is not acceptable. Yoga pants cover the legs up, but too closely. Tight sweaters are okay if the bra doesn't show through. And seriously, when did collarbones become sexualized?
This is not about modesty, or respect, or any of the things they say it is. This is about controlling women. This is about patriarchy. No matter how many women help uphold the crooked system, it remains crooked.
This is the kind of mindset that leads to modesty-shaming, where a young woman at girls camp might be shamed for wearing capris and a sleeved t-shirt because the sleeve ends above her elbow and the shorts don't go far enough past her knee. I saw the picture, she was fine. She was also in a place where there are no boys, but still, how dare she have any skin other than her neck and face showing! Now we just need to decide that the neck and face are also evil so that we can require burqas and be done with it.
I was reading the Pauline Epistles lately, and if anyone is going to say something that sounds stupid and sexist it will be Paul. You know what he says about modesty and women? Don't spend too much time on your hair.
Fixating on clothes would be immodest. The path that we are on is one that will require young women to spend far too much time worrying about clothes, and they won't have any fun with it, but it will at least provide plenty of opportunities for judgment and alienation.
If we can't do better than that on modesty we should quite talking about it. We should at least understand it before we try and teach the young poeple how to do it.
http://www.screendaily.com/festivals/cannes/women-denied-palais-entry-for-wearing-flats/5088395.article?referrer=RSS
This may seem like it has nothing to do with modesty, but the element of inspection reminded me of another story I had recently heard of women back in the day having to kneel to demonstrate that their skirts were long enough, based on whether their hems touched the floor or not.
Allow me to suggest that if that is necessary to tell if the skirt is long enough, it's long enough.
The common factor is that the female body is subject to inspection. Once that is expected, the criteria can become increasingly arbitrary and ridiculous. A heel does not automatically make a shoe beautiful - some heels are really tacky. Many shoes are hidden by the gown length anyway. (I believe I read something about some women being asked to raise their skirts slightly so the heels could be checked.)
Therefore you can decide that even if a girl's collarbone is currently covered, the possibility of the sweater that is covering the collarbone being removed is reason enough to decide that the shirt is still inappropriate enough to send her home.
This teaches our young women two things: their bodies are shameful things and they are not capable of making their own decisions on what is appropriate. Because the reasons their bodies must be hidden are so frequently centered around distractions for the boys, girls are also taught that it is not about them. Even something as basic as what she puts on in the morning is not about her. Finally, though clearly the problem is how easily distracted and low-minded boys are, it is the responsibility of the girls to fix it.
Sadly, she is still required to be attractive, but not attractive in a way that violates the prevailing ill-conceived rules about what is and is not acceptable. Yoga pants cover the legs up, but too closely. Tight sweaters are okay if the bra doesn't show through. And seriously, when did collarbones become sexualized?
This is not about modesty, or respect, or any of the things they say it is. This is about controlling women. This is about patriarchy. No matter how many women help uphold the crooked system, it remains crooked.
This is the kind of mindset that leads to modesty-shaming, where a young woman at girls camp might be shamed for wearing capris and a sleeved t-shirt because the sleeve ends above her elbow and the shorts don't go far enough past her knee. I saw the picture, she was fine. She was also in a place where there are no boys, but still, how dare she have any skin other than her neck and face showing! Now we just need to decide that the neck and face are also evil so that we can require burqas and be done with it.
I was reading the Pauline Epistles lately, and if anyone is going to say something that sounds stupid and sexist it will be Paul. You know what he says about modesty and women? Don't spend too much time on your hair.
Fixating on clothes would be immodest. The path that we are on is one that will require young women to spend far too much time worrying about clothes, and they won't have any fun with it, but it will at least provide plenty of opportunities for judgment and alienation.
If we can't do better than that on modesty we should quite talking about it. We should at least understand it before we try and teach the young poeple how to do it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)