Would You Like Another Tattoo?

Current Issues / Personal / PotD

Feeling Fatigue From Jousting At Windmills

October 29, 2016

Those who want to reap the benefits of this great nation must bear the fatigue of supporting it.— Thomas Paine

charles i. letbetter - feeling fatigue from jousting at windmills

Doing your best and seeing no results creates a fatigue not easily resolved

This is one of those mornings when, after looking through the news headlines and all the currently trending topics, I’m inclined to throw up my hands and move to the Netherlands. This isn’t a single-issue moment. Rather, it is one defined by too many issues, too much effort, and too few results. I don’t want to live in a country where we have the problems we are currently having.

None of us should have to live in a country where militarized police are shooting horses out from under Native Americans who simply want to keep their drinking water reasonably clean. Furthermore, I resent the fact that police officers from Indiana, whose salaries are paid with my tax dollars, are in North Dakota contributing to this travesty. No one asked if they should go, the matter wasn’t even put to a vote by our sorry excuse for a state legislature. They just went, giving the extremely false impression that people of Indiana support the desecration of tribal lands.

I’m no longer interested in supporting a country where the people running for our top political office—all of them, not just the two at the top of this dung heap—are some of the most hilariously inadequate people to ever run for office anywhere. I am beginning to fear going out into public knowing that roughly half the people out there are complete idiots who think that isolationism and unregulated business is a good thing for the country. I don’t want to be around those people. I don’t want to talk to people who have apparently lost the ability to reason.

Banging My Head Against A Wall

I have written emails (since no one actually communicates by letter anymore). I have made phone calls. I have tried playing by the rules of the game and have gotten absolutely nowhere. When I send an email, you know what I get in return? Requests for money, like this one:

I’m close to giving up.
Our final End of Month Deadline is just hours away — and things aren’t looking good.
I won’t sugarcoat this. We are WAY behind where we should be.
I wouldn’t be asking unless it was important.
If we fall short in the final stretch, we can kiss our chance of winning a Democratic Congress goodbye.
We have an ambitious goal — 32,982 gifts in 72 hours. Please, will you pitch in $1 and help?
Thank you,

Nancy Pelosi

Mind you, I didn’t write Congresswoman Pelosi. I wrote my own Congressman, Andre Carson. I’ve written him more than a few times and have never gotten anything more than fundraising emails in response. The same applies for Senators, the Governor, and various other officials in government office. I don’t even trying writing the President. I learned at 16 what a complete waste of time that is.

If no one is going to respond, if my attempts at trying to make a difference fall empty, then how can we say we live in a representative democracy? At this point, I’d be thrilled with a “thank you for writing” form letter, which was formerly the standard response from elected officials.

I will still vote on November 8, because in the race between untrustworthy and absolutely deplorable, I’ll reluctantly go with untrustworthy. I feel I can survive better under an oligarchy than a fascist dictator. Don’t take my vote as an endorsement, though, because it’s not.

We Get What We Deserve?

I keep hearing different pundits say that we get what we deserve, that the disappointing choices for President reflect the decline in our national character, the disintegration of our collective reasoning, and our steep fall into anti-intellectualism. At times, I tend to believe those pundits are correct. After all, three people in Florida, Iowa and Virginia have already been caught attempting to change people’s votes. Not only can we not trust politicians, we can’t trust our neighbors who are working at the polls.

And how is it we can acquit the seven jackasses who took over a federal park by gunpoint, but yet we’re using brute force to remove people protesting at Standing Rock over the desecration of their own land? Are there two different sets of rules that no one has told us about? That’s certainly the way it appears.

Could it be that we have horrible choices for leaders because we have become a country of horrible people?

I don’t buy that. We are still a country of innovators. Look at what Elon Musk is doing to transform your roof into a power source. This is still the country where teens who meet in an online chatroom can grow up and get married. We are still a people who create amazingly unique art, incredibly moving films, and automobiles that drive themselves. Clearly, not all of us are complete fools, despite how we commonly appear.

Do we not deserve a government that reflects our best characteristics and not our worst? Why do we not have a government that better values innovation and invention rather than continuing to support antiquated ideologies that have been proven to not work? Why are we still sending huge portions of our population to jail for no good reason when we’ve known for over thirty years that our current methodology doesn’t work? There are plenty of Americans who are intelligent enough to know that continued war after war after war is a horrible idea; don’t they deserve a government that reflects their views?

Nothing Left To Do

I’m hitting a figurative wall where I no longer desire putting time and energy into a cause that, apparently, is already hopeless. For the past eight years, we have had a President who might very well be one of the most intelligent people to ever hold the office. How did we respond? By electing to Congress the biggest pile of do-nothing bovine excrement to have ever disgraced the name of public service. If that is genuinely what the majority of America is choosing, then America and I no longer have enough in common. Just as we need to distance ourselves from people and things that are not healthy for us, perhaps it is time to do the same with our country. If I cannot, in good conscience, give you my allegiance, and I can’t at this point, then why should I stay around?

I’m not packing my bags just yet, mind you. I am still holding out one thin sliver of hope. But I am fatigued from wanting to improve a country that doesn’t want to improve.

I think I’ll just go back to taking pictures of naked people, if there are any left.

Current Issues

Getting Ready For Whatever Happens Next

October 28, 2016

We are all ready to be savage in some cause. The difference between a good man and a bad one is the choice of the cause. —William James

charles i. letbetter - getting ready for what happens next

With less than two weeks until the general election, there is sufficient reason to be concerned about the future. Are we ready?

11 days until the election. Only 11 days. If this were any other year, we’d be able to look at that date and know that all the nonsense and lies and insanity would quieten down at that point. We don’t know that this year, though. In fact, all indications are that the insanity might actually get worse. I normally wouldn’t take such an alarmist tone except for the fact that, unlike previous years, that’s the tact Homeland Security and law enforcement agencies are taking. Those tend to be fairly level-headed, err-on-the-side-of-caution organizations. Homeland Security is especially good at understating threat levels. So, when they express a heightened level of concern, all my bells and whistles start sounding. Here’s what I’ve seen so far this week:

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior federal law enforcement official told NBC News that “local, state and federal authorities and even multi-agency Fusion Centers are on the lookout for signs of trouble.”
The Washington Post reports: ” the Oath Keepers, a national group of former military and law enforcement officers, has urged its members to “blend in” with voters and do “incognito intelligence gathering and crime spotting” at polling places across the country on Nov. 8.”
Huffington Post not only reported that intimidation group Vote Protectors, “plans to send volunteers to monitor polling places in nine cities with high minority populations on Election Day,” but also demonstrated how extremely easy it is to create the badges the group plans to use.

And there’s still more.

Is The Threat Real?

I would really like to think that the threat is just a bunch of stupid (VERY stupid) old white men running off at the mouth. Certainly, that’s what we thought of the claims of violence and civil war that preceded the two previous presidential elections. We recognized the racists for the minority they are and ignored them. Both times, they went away, thoroughly beaten. Even the FBI investigated few of the claims.

This year, however, is different. Homeland Security, the FBI, and local police forces are on “heightened” alert. Now, why do you suppose they would do that if they didn’t feel that threats being made were at least partially credible? Looking not only at incidents of violence and intimidation at political rallies, Homeland Security monitors other forms of “chatter” and activities that might indicate a higher level of danger. They don’t like raising threat levels just for fun.

In addition to domestic concerns, the State Department has issued alerts for several embassies around the world specifically for Election Day. Some are closed for 48 hours either side of November 8 while others are closed only for the day itself. Still others are saying their embassy borders will be closed and barricaded on November 8 and will not reopen until safety can be confirmed. The Department of Defense is paying special attention to chatter between terror cells with known US connections and Homeland Security has stated concern that Daesh-connected cells in the US could be planning events to disrupt the election itself.

Oh, and then, there’s still that matter of the Russians hacking the DNC email servers. If they can get into secure servers, who knows that they might try to pull on Election Day? So yeah, I would consider that, at least, a portion of the threat is valid.

How Should We Respond?

We have to trust that law enforcement officials are well-prepared to deal with any significant threat. However, a lot of what concerns the average voter is smaller-scale intimidation and interference. After all, Indianapolis has always taken a rather peaceful approach to solving its problems. We tend to not be a high-profile target. Also, Roger Stone, head of Vote Protectors, has since ordered the badge creator and other disruptive instructions removed from the organization’s website. Again, a lot of angry old white men spewing hot air.

Still, neither Homeland Security nor the FBI is backing down. So, what are our options if we are to be reasonably prepared for whatever might happen not only on November 8 but the days following? We have some ideas:

Vote. There is absolutely no excuse for not voting. If you can vote early, vote early. If you need to take someone with you for protection, then do so. If you are eligible to vote, this election needs your presence.
If you feel even slightly intimidated by anyone you see at or near a polling place, say something. Contact the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, at 800/253-3931 or email at voting.section@usdoj.gov. Do NOT call local police as they have no direct jurisdiction over polling places.
Stay away from polling places other than to vote or pick up YOUR children from a school. Once you’ve voted, leave. There’s no reason to hang around and create a crowd.
Take basic precautions against the threat of local violence. Make sure your car has gas and you have enough food to last a couple of days should you need to stay home.
Don’t join any demonstrations. Demonstrations turn into riots and then people get hurt. Stay home. Watch Netflix. Eat popcorn. There’s no reason to fuel a fire.
Consider hosting an election night orgy. I actually saw this recommended on the Late Show With Stephen Colbert last night. Naked people are less likely to become violent and dangerous.
Just go ahead and move to Canda. Beat the rush.

There are probably a few other things you could do, such as hoard left-over Halloween candy to help keep up your energy. The biggest consideration, I think, is to stay clear of fools and avoid any large groups that might be considered a target. If everyone would do that then we wouldn’t have a problem, would we?

I understand being passionate about the election. I understand being passionate about a candidate. There is no way I will ever understand people threatening violence in a way that has the potential to destroy our democracy. There’s now way to tell which direction things might swing. We just have to be ready for whatever happens.

Current Issues / PotD

Domination Destruction: Killing Everything We Find

October 28, 2016

charles i. letbetter - domination destruction: killing our own planet

In our work and in our living, we must recognize that difference is a reason for celebration and growth, rather than a reason for destruction. —Audre Lorde

charles i. letbetter - domination destruction: killing everything in our path

As humans assert their domination over the planet, destruction inevitably follows

Typically, when we talk about human violence, we’re talking about our tendency to want to destroy each other. Syria. Yemen. Iraq. Afghanistan. North Korea. Chicago. Our propensity toward killing each other is nothing new, of course. We’ve been doing it for centuries. Misinterpret some religious texts and one can even attempt to justify their destruction of another people by claiming that their deity commanded them to wipe out everyone who does not worship as they do. We’re very good and very experienced when it comes to wiping each other off the face of the earth.

As we’ve become more advanced in our ways of killing each other, such as using drones so that we don’t have to actually face those on whom we drop bombs, we’ve also become better at destroying every non-human entity as well. Species and ecosystems that have existed for thousands of years have become targets of destruction to such a degree that many have already gone extinct with hundreds more in danger. We justify our destruction of the planet with various excuses, saying we need the energy from natural resources or the food from various species. Yet, our wanton decimation of these ecosystems could leave us with nothing but a barren wasteland of a planet that is no longer capable of sustaining our own lives, much less any other.

A new report from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) makes clear just how horribly destructive we’ve been and how threatening the dangers are. By killing everything around us, we’re dooming ourselves to destruction.

Say Goodbye To The Animals

We typically associate the WWF with its broad efforts to protect animal life across the planet. They certainly do the best they can, but their efforts are no match for the determined march of corporate interests. As a result, we’re losing animal life at an unprecedented rate. The statement that’s been making headlines is this one:

Populations of vertebrate animals—such as mammals, birds, and fish—have declined by 58% between 1970 and 2012. And we’re seeing the largest drop in freshwater species: on average, there’s been a whopping 81% decline in that time period.

Stop and think about those numbers a minute. We have less than half the animals we did in 1970. It took us less than fifty years to rip through the entire animal population of the planet, completely devastating whole species who have survived natural changes in environment for hundreds of thousands of years. Many of the species we’ve eliminated existed prior to the evolution of homo sapiens and even through the first several thousand years of our existence. Yet, in less time than it takes for a single human generation to pass through history, we have destroyed all of them.

Most damning is what we’ve done to freshwater species. 81 percent of freshwater species are gone! Do you realize how fucking close to complete extermination of freshwater life we’ve come in a simple 42 years? And for what? So we can build our hydro-electric dams, strip mine coal, and place water-contaminating oil pipelines in places they’ve no right to be in the first place. Understand, prior to 1970 we still had the same power needs, but we somehow managed to not kill off EIGHTY-ONE FUCKING PERCENT of freshwater species. Hope you’re enjoying that fresh trout and other fish because they could all be completely gone within the next twenty years if we continue at our current rate.

How Did We Do This?

Obviously, we didn’t commit such broad destruction across the planet by going through and killing every animal one by one. While poaching and illegal fishing are certainly part of the problem, there are many other factors that have contributed to this dramatic decline in animal species. I’ll let the folks at WWF explain:

Habitat Loss and Degradation

Habitat loss and degradation is the most common threat to animals on the decline. Everything from unsustainable agriculture to residential or commercial development to energy production can damage vital areas for wildlife. WWF helps countries take stock of their natural resources and use that information to make better decisions on how to grow.

Food Systems

Our current food system impacts habitats to make way for agriculture, leads to the overfishing of our oceans, and contributes to pollution. WWF is pursuing new ways to provide nutritious food for all while minimizing the negative impact on the natural world. Watch the video.

Climate Change

As our climate changes, various animals will need to adapt to survive. Changes in temperature can mix up signals that trigger events like migration and reproduction, causing them to happen at the wrong time. The global community is taking major strides to curb climate change in the coming years.

Species Overexploitation

Animals face the dangers of overexploitation, too. Sometimes that’s direct, like through poaching and unsustainable hunting and harvesting, and sometimes that’s indirect, like through unintentionally catching one type of sea creature while attempting to catch another. WWF works to stop wildlife crime and prevent illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing.

Numbering Our Own Days

How long do you plan on living? If you’re under the age of forty, chances are very high you’ll live well into your 80s, and quite possibly another decade beyond that. Think of all it is gong to take to support your life over that period of time. Think of the amount of food you’ll need to consume. What is going to be the source of that food? Think about the clothes you’ll need to wear. What is going to be the source of the materials necessary to make those clothes? Think about all the energy you’ll need to consume to power a life that is increasingly dependent upon electronic devices. How are we going to source all that power?

To the extent that we continue to destroy everything and everyone with whom we come into contact, we are numbering our own days. We cannot continue to live on a planet that has been scorched by our carelessness. Realize, we have already KILLED OVER HALF OF ALL SPECIES that existed in 1970. If we continue at that rate, we might have 40 years before everything is gone. Where does that leave us?

This is why your down-ballot votes matter. Your vote for Congressperson matters as that is where funding and policy decisions are made to help stop the destruction. Your vote for state legislature matters as state policies are frequently to blame for the continued destruction for fresh waterways. Your vote for city offices matter as local policies contribute heavily to the contamination of groundwater and the destruction of local resources. These are all things that the President can’t control. While your vote for that office is important, without your vote for all the other down-ballot offices the vote for President becomes practically meaningless.

For all the talk about colonizing Mars, the fact remains that, for at least the next 75 years, we are limited to one planet; a planet we are actively bent upon destroying. Perhaps it’s time we started paying more attention to the earth around us. If we don’t, we will die; it’s just that simple.

Just For Fun / PotD

Halloween Is The Time To Explore Erotic Fantasies

October 27, 2016

charles i. letbetter - halloween is time to explore erotic fantasies

The interesting thing is how one guy, through living out his own fantasies, is living out the fantasies of so many other people. —Hugh Hefner

charles i. letbetter - halloween is a time to explore erotic fantasies

Halloween has long been a time for adults to indulge their fantasies

I was a little surprised when I went to check what day the city would allow trick-or-treating. With Halloween falling on a Monday this year, I wouldn’t have been surprised had Saturday, or even Friday been chosen for the annual costumed candy grab. Doing the neighborhood walk thing on a Monday night isn’t really all that bad, I suppose. Sure, it keeps kids up a little past their bedtimes on a school night, but I recall doing the exact same thing when we were kids. The difference is that my brother and I were never rushed through the ritual so that our parents could get to their own party. For many kids today, Mom and Dad can’t wait to get the little ones to bed so the adults can do some partying of their own.

Halloween as an adult party time isn’t new. Since the mid-80s, it has often seemed as though October 31 is more of an adult holiday than it is for kids. Night clubs go all out with special events and costume shops have more “sexy” ideas for adults than they do cartoon characters for kids. The costumed rituals around viewings of Rocky Horror Picture Show got things started. Then, the movie Eyes Wide Shut with Tom Cruise and Nichole Kidman ignited the concept of secret erotic costume parties and adults everywhere took the idea and ran with it.

We like the idea of having one time a year where we can indulge our more erotic fantasies without necessarily revealing our identities. What better time to explore?

Women Taking The Lead

One of the reasons Halloween has continued to be a popular adult party is because women have increasingly taken the lead in exploring their more erotic fantasies. Let’s face it, of all the “sexy” costumes out there, most are for women. This isn’t just because women have embraced the concept, but also the fact that, sadly, too many guys think that showing off their junk is sexy. Sorry guys, it’s not and it never will be. Since too many men are clueless when it comes to erotic fantasies, women have dominated the topic and take charge of directing the conversation.

Since women’s sexuality is their focus, the folks over at lelo.com asked women to rank their sexual fantasies. Here’s where the poll current stands as I’m writing:

Oral sex.
Submission.
Bondage.
Threesomes
Anal sex.
Exhibitionism.
Exploring Bicuriosity.
Pegging (manual prostate massage).
Domination
Orgies

A couple of things about that list are worth notice. First, it is a live poll so rankings change based on the people participating. Second, there’s nothing that prohibits men from voting as well, so the rankings could be skewed in a few places. This isn’t a scientific poll so the level of trustworthiness isn’t all that high.

Still, what the poll does show us is that women’s fantasies are changing and that they are definitely something they want to explore. The best-selling book 50 Shades of Grey is likely at least partially responsible for Submission and Bondage ranking so high on the poll at the moment, but these have always been a portion of the content of women’s fantasies. Why do you think the book sold so well in the first place? Fantasies, not the presence of great literature, propelled the book to the top of sales charts. Women have some imaginative fantasies and enjoy being in charge of fulfilling them.

Halloween Is The Right Time

If we’re so big on exploring our fantasies, though, why do we wait until Halloween to do anything about them? Blame a very judgmental and sexist society. While almost everyone enjoys letting their freaky side out every once in a while, we’re fearful of being “outed” for our sexual proclivities. Women get the worst of it. Slut-shaming has long been a problem in our society; one that starts even in elementary school and gets worse from there. Anyone who publicly displays any level of sexual indulgence is ridiculed, mocked, and socially derided. Not exactly a good atmosphere for trying something new and possibly kinky.

The costumed craziness of Halloween gives us a chance to play around a bit without all the risks. If everyone is being a little freaky then one person’s indulgences aren’t as likely to stand out as much. Clever costumes can even allow one a level of denial if ever charged with behavior not typically acceptable in a public setting. The erotic charge of the holiday has become common enough that any out-of-the-ordinary behavior is easily excused. “We were just goofing off, playing around,” are words often heard on November 1.

The thing about fantasies is that we’re not always sure we’ll really like them if we try them. Halloween gives us a chance to explore without being fully committed. Yet, what happens at Halloween can develop into a lot more than just “playing around.” Indulging in our fantasies can be freeing not only on a sexual level, but in our relationships as well. What starts hidden behind a mask can ultimately help us define who we are. We have the potential to find new strengths and hidden pleasures we didn’t know existed.

A Little Preparation

Not every fantasy is one that a person just jumps into by donning a costume. Just as there are things we do to protect our children while they’re out trick-or-treating, there are precautions adults should take before jumping head-first into a fantasy they’ve never tried. A little reading and a lot of communication with your partner(s) is generally a safe place to start.

Again, the folks at Lelo have some good suggestions for those just starting out.

if you’re unsure about oral sex, check out this article as well as this one.
Interested in submission? I strongly suggest you start by reading this article.
Bondage requires some caution, so read this before giving it a try.
Before even thinking about a threesome, you want to consider these details.
Anal sex can be painful if not done correctly. Read this before you go there.
Exhibitionism is more than just flashing the bouncer. You need to read this.
Bicurious? Chances are you have a friend who can help but if you’re shy then take a look at this.
Pegging also requires some care and caution. Please read this and talk to your partner before trying anything new.
47% of women fantasize about being dominant. For some, it’s easy. For everyone else, start here.
Orgies can be loads of fun, but there are both rules and cautions one needs to heed.

With a little planning, Halloween can be a wonderfully expressive opportunity for you to explore and try new things. We all need an opportunity to indulge our more erotic thoughts. Decide on what you want to try, choose a creatively erotic costume, and have fun! The best treats are the ones that leave a smile on your face the next morning. Enjoy!

Art / Photography

Could Artificial Intelligence Help Us Appreciate Art?

October 26, 2016

Forget artificial intelligence – in the brave new world of big data, it’s artificial idiocy we should be looking out for. —Tom Chatfield

charles i. letbetter - could artificial intelligence help us appreciate art

The average person struggles to understand art. Artificial Intelligence could help solve that problem

If you went to a liberal arts university, or a reasonably well-funded high school, you likely took a course mysteriously referred to as “Art Appreciation.” Your instructor, who might have been an art history major if you were lucky, spent the duration of the semester trying to convince everyone that art was cool while simultaneously imposing a list of dates and names one was required to memorize in order to pass the sanctioned tests. The courses are required as part of the accreditation for most university programs in hopes that the institutions produce reasonably well-rounded graduates.

No, it doesn’t work.

A minority of the US population actually appreciates art on any level. Not because they don’t want to, mind you. Ask most people if they like art and they’ll tell you they do. However, actually appreciating the work requires a deeper understanding than just “liking” art. Giving a work the “thumbs up” on Facebook is a long way from being able to discuss the work’s merits or the motivations of the artist.

The general concept of art, for many people, is that it fall into two categories: the pieces where one can tell what the picture is, or those where they can’t. We “like” those pieces we find easy to understand, especially those brightly colored paintings of the Romantic period. More challenging to the common aesthetic are those pieces that demand abstract thought, almost any major work from the late 19th century forward. Hang a Jackson Pollock painting and wait. Someone will inevitably ask if it was painted by an elephant or a four-year-old. Every time.

Maybe We Need A Little Help

One of the reasons we have so much difficulty with comprehending visual art is that we are challenged to connect it to what is going on in our own lives. After all, much of the artwork that we find in traditional museums pre-dates most of us by at least 100 years or more. What was relevant to the artist is not necessarily still relevant in a contemporary setting. We are often asked to have an understanding not only of art styles, but history, fashion, and politics in ways that are completely lost to us. People wander through a gallery without hardly a clue as to why a work is important or what makes one more valuable than the other.

The curators of museums feel your pain. They want visitors to appreciate the collections they’ve worked so hard to assemble. Understanding how different works by various artists connect not only to each other but also to our own lives is a struggle every curator feels at one point or another. Obviously, the curators see the connections, but they do so drawing heavily not only on their depth of accumulated knowledge but on their own life experiences with art. Transferring that experience from themselves to their guests is almost impossible.

Enter the Tate Britain, one of the world’s premiere art museums. Each year, the Tate offers its IK Prize for promoting the use of technology in the exploration of art. Named after philanthropist Irene Kreitman, the prize this year was awarded to a team in Treviso, Italy for their entry, Recognition. Created by Fabrica with the help of JoliBrain, an artificial intelligence firm, and Microsoft, which helped fund the project, Recognition uses artificial intelligence to match photographs from current photojournalists with works of art at the Tate. The presumption is that by relating works of art with modern photographs, we might better understand the art.

How It Works

There are, obviously, a lot of questions to ask about an artificial intelligence program’s ability to understand and comprehend art. The folks at Fabrica are quick to explain that this is an experimental program and that a more accurate technology would require years more research and input. Recognition is not flawless by any stretch of the imagination. Yet, by forcing consideration of a strict set of criteria, even the mistakes help us to more deeply examine both the structure of art and of the images around us. Consider the criteria Recognition uses for comparison. These definitions are taken directly from the program itself:

Object recognition is a process for identifying specific objects. Its algorithms rely on matching, learning, or pattern recognition using appearance-based or feature-based analysis.
Facial recognition is a process for identifying human faces. In addition to locating the human faces in an image, it determines the age, gender, and emotional state of each subject it finds.
Composition recognition is a process for identifying prominent shapes and structures, visual layout, and colours.
Context recognition is a process which analyses the titles, dates, tags, and descriptions associated with each image. By reading this text, it’s also how recognition learns how to write a caption for each match.

Images with close similarity in these four categories are selected as a match, and displayed in Recognition‘s gallery. You can watch the process online through November 27. I’ve been watching it most of the morning, absolutely mesmerized. Recognition makes three or four matches an hour. Some of them immediately make sense. Others require more thought. And, inevitably, there are those where one has to conceded that maybe the computer got it wrong. But hey, at least it tried.

How Much Do We Want To Learn?

Visitors to the exhibit at the Tate have the ability to help Recognition learn by making better suggestions to the matches that it makes. Given that the exhibition is only open through the end of November, however, means that there is a distinct limit to how much the program could learn. If one were to leave it running for five years or more, I would suspect that its ability to match photographs to works of art would become extremely accurate, but such an exhibition would require a tremendous amount of funding and even the Tate’s extensive pockets don’t run that deep.

Yes, there are more than a few detractors. One needs to have a better-than-average knowledge of the Tate’s catalog in order to participate and interact with any level of accuracy. The interface isn’t exactly friendly and the errors are sometimes so mindboggling as to leave one disappointed in the entire technology.

Yet, it would seem that artificial intelligence has a lot it can teach us. The technology is still very much in its infancy. If anything, it teaches us that understanding art is a learning process itself. Applying strict analysis to what has traditionally been seen as a subjective opinion forces different modes and conditions of examination. Art viewers are forced to take on different considerations that may not be especially comfortable. Making those adjustments, however, are what deepens our own understanding of art.

I wish I had time to fly to London and watch other people interacting with Recognition. I think it would be interesting to study how even a basic interaction with the program alters one’s perception of the art pieces displayed in the gallery. This is an exciting exhibition, one that could genuinely improve public appreciation and understanding of art, which could eventually translate into better public funding for the arts and for artists.

At least, we can hope for that outcome, can’t we?

Editorial / PotD / publishing

Looking For A Better Source Of News

October 26, 2016

charles i. letbetter - looking for a different source for news

To a philosopher all news, as it is called, is gossip, and they who edit and read it are old women over their tea. —Henry David Thoreau

charles i. letbetter - looking for a different news source

As the face of information gathering changes, we wonder if there is any news source left that we can trust

Well, fuck.

That just describes my morning, which started at 4:00 AM. Rain started falling while I was walking the dog. I accidentally punted a cat in the dark when we returned. I forgot to block the hallway and the damp dog decided to get in bed with Kat. I spilled my coffee. Then, immediately after clicking the link to a story that sounded interesting, a box pops up telling me this is the last of my free articles for the month. I’ve had better mornings.

The last item, the one about using my last free click for the month is happening more often. As an increasing number of newspapers have had to turn to paywalls to pay the bills, the number of reliable news sources accessible at any given time begins to shrink. A prime example is Business of Fashion, a UK-based fashion magazine that exists primarily online. Having been free since their inception, I’ve come to rely on its up-to-date information of everything going on in the fashion industry. Their news is not only timely but largely reliable. Starting this week, however, they’ve put everything behind a rather expensive paywall. Sure, it comes out to less than the price of a cup of coffee per day if I pay for the whole year in advance, but that would be quite a dent in our cash flow. So, I’ll have to deal with the five articles a month to which I am now limited.

Am I just cheap or is there a problem here?

Social News Junkies

I’ve always had an addiction of sorts to news. At one point, back when print was the only option, I subscribed to three different daily papers, four weekly magazines, and six monthlies. Our recycling bin was always overflowing and there was never any shortage of newsprint for craft projects. Mind you, at that particular point in time, I wasn’t writing a damn thing. All I did was take pictures all day. No one was interested in my opinion and I was much more careful about when and where I expressed such.

A lot has changed over the past 30 years, though. Print subscription rates have gone up, dramatically in some cases. Every major news and information source, from the New York Times to National Public Radio to your local television station has an online presence and, in most cases, when they first came online they were free. The number of news and information sources became so numerous that they gave rise to aggregators such as Huffington Post. The upside of aggregators is that they assembled all the really important stuff from a myriad of different sources. The downside was that they did so with a very marked and obvious political bias. Next came social media, which aggregated the aggregators, and as the volume of viewers grew into the millions the number of sources with blatant political motivations grew as well.

Now, we are faced with two problems. First, the original model of relying on display ads to pay the bills hasn’t worked. Over the past three years, the number of newspapers putting the majority of their content behind a paywall has tripled. They’ve had no choice. They still need to pay the bills. At the same time, however, the reliability of all news/information sources combined has declined, dramatically.

Freedom Of Information

Once upon a time, there was a reliable source of global information that was available to everyone: the public library. Any time I came across a reference to a source to which I wasn’t already subscribed, I could make my way to the library’s periodical section and most usually find the source I needed. Libraries are still there, of course, but as demand for space and revenue has shifted, resources have been removed from periodical subscriptions in favor of Internet needs. Walk into the beautiful downtown branch of the Indianapolis Public Library and the periodicals section is not only significantly smaller, it’s also hidden, relegated to a corner of the second floor.

While the shift away from print subscriptions seems to make sense on the surface, it hasn’t resulted in more online subscriptions. While libraries have invested thousands of dollars in computers with Internet access, those services don’t necessarily include online periodical subscriptions. Why? The majority of public computer use is not for reading periodicals. Job searches and educational programming dominate, right after checking one’s Facebook status. So, if the library doesn’t subscribe to the print edition of a periodical, access is still just as limited as it would be if one had just stayed home.

At the same time, as biased and unreliable sources of information increases, many sources we’ve long considered reliable are either downsizing or going away altogether. Titles that were once mainstays, such as Newsweek and US News And World Report are barely recognizable in their online forms. Reliable, honest information is quickly going the way of the Dodo bird.

Not As Informed As We Think

An informed electorate is necessary for a democracy to work. The entire system dissolves when the people doing the voting are no longer getting reliable, trustworthy information from which they can make intelligent decisions.

Look at us. Look at this election cycle. Consider the absolute nonsense one hears being spouted at political rallies. This is not an informed electorate. In fact, I would be willing to go out on a limb and guess that, at the very least, 70 percent of those who are voting in the upcoming election are making their decision based in part on incorrect and unfounded information. Whether it has come from Fox News or CNN or MSNBC is irrelevant. None of them are reliable. None of them can be trusted. Yet, those are the sources from which an overwhelming number of Americans get their news.

We need new sources of news. We need to know that the articles we’re reading have been vetted, that sources have been confirmed, and that the people and organizations doing the reporting are being held responsible for what they report. Americans, and citizens around the world, need to once again be able to trust the news and information they receive.

At the same time, I am of the opinion that there needs to be a greater distinction between actual news, that information that directly impacts our lives, and more casual forms of information. I may go to the newspaper for the box score of last night’s Cubs/Indians game, but if I want to know the ridiculous pre-game superstitions of the starting lineup I should have to find a different source. Our propensity for finding everything in one place is severely diminishing the value of everything we consume and news is at the very top of that list.

We’re Tired Of This Shit

A new research report from the Pew Research Center states that “More than one-third of social media users are worn out by the amount of political content they encounter.” I have to wonder if any part of that fatigue comes from the fact that, not only has this election cycle gone on far too long, we know all too well that the information being distributed through social media is either horribly slanted or an outright lie. We’re exhausted from trying to parse out what is true (very little) with what isn’t (far too much).

Something in my gut tells me that if the good folks at the Pew Center were to ask, they’d find that a large number of people are equally exhausted with all the social media content they encounter, with the possible exception of kitten videos. In an effort to make themselves more attractive to the masses, news sources have too often become little more than slightly modified versions of what People magazine once was, while sources such as People have become more like The National Enquirer. When we sit down to read what we presume to be a legitimate news article, we shouldn’t have to wonder whether the content and its sources are legitimate!

I understand the need for publications to resort to paywalls. The ad model just doesn’t work for them in an online environment. However, the more distance we put between the American populace and legitimate news sources, the few that remain, the more our democracy continues to erode. Uninformed people make stupid decisions in the voting booth. As bad as this election cycle has been, it can, and will, get worse. We need news sources that are reliable, honest, and accessible. Short of that, there is no hope for democracy to return to our country.

Editorial / pop culture

Really Stupid Reasons To File A Lawsuit

October 25, 2016

If a man belittles a woman, it could become a lawsuit. If women belittle men, it’s a Hallmark card. —Warren Farrell

charles i. letbetter - silly reason for a lawsuit

Everyone wants to sue someone else and rarely is there a good reason

Everywhere I look this morning, someone is threatening to file a lawsuit against someone else. Of course, the big one in the news recently has been the threats on the part of the Republican nominee for President who claims he’s going to file a lawsuit against all the women who claim he sexually assaulted them. Most of us look at that threat as empty, yet another attempt on the part of the candidate to bully people because, you know, that’s all he really is: a big bully.

However, in response to that threat, there is news today that at least one of the women claiming to have been assaulted says that if the Republican candidate sues her, she’s going to turn around and file a lawsuit against him. She’s claiming emotional distress from him calling her names and such. Should any of this mess actually see the inside of a courtroom, which is probably won’t, she probably has a better case than the Republican candidate does against her.

Oh, and the candidate’s legal problems don’t end there. It would seem that some of his fellow Republicans don’t want to be associated with their party’s candidate in any way, shape, or form. So, when their party’s candidate created ads that imply there is a connection between the Congressmen and the Presidential nominee, the Congressmen threatened to, you guessed it, file a lawsuit. Understand, this isn’t just one Republican, which could be dismissed as petty. FIVE of them are threatening to sue. They’re claiming defamation of character. Go figure.

Oh, and just to prove we’re not all focused on politics, Suge Knight is threatening to sue Dr. Dre. Suge claims that Dre cut him out of the Apple deal for Beats by Dre. Understand, Knight is already in jail for the alleged murder of Terry Carter and claims Dre hired a hitman to remove his presence from this planet.

As utterly stupid as that whole mess sounds, we found some lawsuits that are worse. Americans can be really dense.

Budweiser Sued For False Advertising

I could almost see this one having some legitimacy if the beer maker was claiming that their beer actually tasted like something other than swill. They’re not, though. Instead, some dude in Michigan, whose brain, we assume, was frozen during the harsh winter they have up there, was upset because no bikini-clad models appeared out of nowhere for him as they did in the commercial.

No, seriously, he actually filed a lawsuit. You can read all about the damn thing here. Apparently, this guy doesn’t understand the difference between reality and fantasy. I’m betting he still thinks all the girls on OkCupid are real, too.

The Cases Against Amusement Parks

A lot of people apparently think that amusement parks are easy lawsuit targets. My guess is that someone told them all they have to do is file and that the parks will settle out of court. Sounds like an easy payday, right? Uhm, not necessarily so. While the parks do often settle legitimate claims privately when they’re obviously at fault, they don’t just throw money at everyone who sues them.

Back in March, 2009, the Orlando Sentinel ran a story about all the crazy reasons people give when attempting to sue the many amusement parks in that area. The list is somewhere between amusing and unbelievable. For example, a man from Virginia sued Disney World in 2005, saying food poisoning caused him to gag so badly he ruptured his esophagus. Now, I’ve had some really bad food at amusement parks, but gagging hard enough to rupture the esophagus? Dude, just spit it out and move on.

Then, there was the woman from Hawaii who sued Busch Gardens-Tampa Bay in 2006, saying she contracted a rare blood disease when a wayward vulture from a trained bird show clawed her legs. I’m guessing the lady looked so close to death that the vulture was just going for an early snack. Yes, that’s a cruel thing to say. No, I’m not especially sympathetic.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why it costs an arm and a leg to go to an amusement park. All these ridiculous lawsuits raise the park’s insurance and, naturally, they pass that cost along to those who buy the tickets. YOU are the reason we can’t have nice things. Again. Stupid.

Some People Don’t Learn

We’ve all heard about the high costs of higher education. People are frequently graduating from college with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt and are unable to find a job. I’m sure we can all understand and appreciate the amount of stress that causes. However, one young lady decided, after a grueling three-month job search (cue: What I Did Over Summer Vacation) decided to sue her alma mater, Monroe College, for the $70,000 she spent on a BS in IT.

Now, this wouldn’t be the first time that a college has gotten into trouble for allegedly promising its graduates jobs, especially in WTF fields such as court reporting and “general business.” However, this child has a degree in IT. Given all the IT jobs available across this country, if she’s not able to land one of them one has to assume one of the following problems must have occurred:

She slept through all her classes and didn’t actually manage to learn a damn thing
She has absolutely no interview skills, which is saying something considering the field she’s in
She never actually filled out an application
She mistakenly thought the IT recruiters were going to come to her
She spilled hot coffee in the lap of every recruiter she met

Seriously, if one has any skill in IT at all, they should be able to get a job. Granted, it might mean moving outside the Bronx, which isn’t exactly the IT capital of anything. Still, the openings in IT are so voluminous that almost anyone who can spell IT can get a job in IT.

Following The Leader

Still, even with a treasure trove of really stupid reasons for filing a lawsuit available on the Internet (seriously, it was one of the easiest searches ever), we have to consider the fact that honest, hardworking, intelligent people would rather stay out of court unless they have a legitimate claim. If the police kill your child while he’s playing innocently in the park, then yes, you have good reason to sue. If a drug company suddenly raises the price of a life-saving drug by 5000% for no good reason, then yes, drop the hammer on those sons of bitches. If the airbag in your car is more dangerous than carrying a loaded gun with the safety off, then by all means, someone needs to be held accountable. There are legitimate reasons good people file lawsuits.

What we’re seeing, though, is that the person who wants to be leader of the free world uses the threat of lawsuits to get what he wants: more money. If he can get away with it, and he has for years, then everyone else on the freakin’ planet is going to try and follow that example. As clogged up as the courts already are, the situation could get so very much worse. There could be lawsuits because one failed to mention how pretty the candidate’s wife is. There could be lawsuits because one dared to call a delinquent child a troublemaker. If the Congressmen’s lawsuit stands, that would open the door for people being sued just because someone called them a friend!

Is this really the kind of leadership we need, people who misuse the courts to bully others around? We both know damn good and well it isn’t. Watch how you vote, though. If someone doesn’t win we might all get sued.

Just For Fun / Photography / PotD

FREE Photography Education In Just One Page

October 25, 2016

charles i. letbetter - FREE photo education

Makeup artists are always giving me their stuff. My favorite thing is free stuff. I’ll take anything. —Cindy Margolis

charles i. letbetter - free photography course

Photography education is just like everything else: you get what you pay for

Hey ya’ll! My name is Mortimier Chunkendunck but ya’ll can call me Mort. I’m a good friend, well, actually more of a distant acquaintance, of ol’ Chuck Letbetter and he’s done gone and given me permission to teach ya’ll a little bit about photography. I’ve known ol’ Chuck since he was still wet behind the ears. I’ll tell ya’, that boy couldn’t tell the difference between a lens cap and a shutter button when he first started. That’s a story for a different time with lots of alcohol, though. He’s only giving me one page to do all this learnin’ for ya’ll here.

You see, how this all got started was that an ad from something called Shutter magazine. Not Shutterbug, mind you, which is something totally different about a lot of the same stuff. This here Shutter magazine has been promoting these ads on your Facebook sayin’ they’ll give ya’ a free photography lesson, or somethin’ like that. There’s a pretty picture on the ad and I’m guessing that’s what gets most people’s attention. Click on that there ad, though, and you find out there ain’t nothing much free. You get this page here that says ya’ gotta subscribe to that there magazine to get anything. And ya’ gotta get what they be callin’ an “Elite+” membership to be gettin’ any lessons about anything. Now, I don’t know what neck of the woods you grew up in, but ’round here that’s not what we call free.

So, ol’ Chuck calls me up—well,actually, I been houndin’ him a fair deal on Facebook to let me write somethin’ for him—but anyway, he says to me, he says, “Why don’t you go write a one-page photography course since you already know everythin’ ’bout everythin’?” An’ I says back at him, “Why, I’d be right honored to do that fer ya’>” So strap in an try to pay attention ‘cuz this here is some high-level information I be givin’ ya’ll here.

You Need A Camera

charles i. letbetter - free photography education

If you can’t find the camera in this picture, you probably shouldn’t be a photographer

I know, that pretty young woman in that picture is a bit distractin’ for some of ya’ll. Let me just tell ya’ right now ya’ll probably ain’t got the smarts to keep up with that young lady there. Ya’ might as well just keep your mind on the topic here, which is cameras, and that’s exactly what she’s holding in her hands: a camera. You’re gonna need one of those things if ya’ll plan on being a photographer. No, dangit, your phone does not count. Takin’ a phone to a photo shoot is like showin’ up at church without a Bible, ’bout all ya’ can do is watch.

Now, I know a lot of people make a big freakin’ deal ’bout the kind of camera they be usin’. Let me tell ya’ right here and now that it don’t make one damn bit of difference one way or the other when you’re just startin’ out. Yeah, I know those really pricey ones got all the gizmos and gadgets that are fun and look good in the store, but if’n ya’ll don’t have the first clue’ bout takin’ a picture all the gizmos and gadgets on the planet ain’t gonna help ya’ none. Get yourself somethin’ simple so you can find that there ISO setting without having to turn the dang camera upside down and sideways. Ya’ don’t need 250 on-board filters if’n ya’ keep choppin’ everybody’s head off in the pictures. Like my momma told my pappy, “Keep it simple, Stupid.” She told him that ’bout a lot of things. That’s why I have 11 brothers and sisters.

Jus’ git yo’self a decent little camera there. Get one that feels good in your hands. If’n ya’ have tiny little dainty hands, like that there Republican feller that Chuck doesn’t like, then you’ll be wantin’ one of those smaller little boxes ya’ll can pick up for cheap. If’n ya’ have big ol’ farmer’s hands, though, you’re gonna be wantin’ something heavy enough ya’ don’t break it jus’ tryin’ to put the lens on the front. Try ’em out like ya’ would a good pair of work gloves. Git a feel for ’em.

You Need A Subject

charles i. letbetter - free photography education in one page

Models make wonderful subjects, except when they don’t

Now, if’n ya’ gonna be a photographer, ya’ gotta decide what kinda subject you’re gonna shoot. No, De-Wayne, put down that shotgun, that ain’t the kinda shootin’ we be talkin’ ’bout. Ya’ need to decide what kinda pictures you’re gonna take. If’n ya’ take pictures of pretty people, like the young lass in this picture, then us normal folk will like yo’ work. If’n ya’ take pictures of ugly people in black and white, then all them high falutin’ artsy dodgers gonna like yo’ work. HowEVER, though, there’s only one way yo’re gonna make your grandma happy and that’s if’n ya take pictures of old barns and that ol’ oak tree back there by the crik when it turns all them colors and the Grand Canyon and stuff. Ya’ probably don’t want to go makin’ Grandma mad now, I hear she’s been updatin’ her will just in case the good Lord takes her away. Jus’ between you and me, I wish he’d get on with it ‘cuz Grandma’s done past her expiration date an’ is startin’ to smell a bit, if’n ya’ know what I mean. But don’t be tellin’ her I said that.

ANYway, takin’ picture of blank walls isn’t gonna get ya’ very far. Ya’ gotta have a subject and ya’ kinda want to keep takin’ pictures of the same kinda subject so that folks’ll know what to be expectin’ from ya’. Ya’ don’t need no tree photographer takin’ pictures at Darla Mae’s weddin’ next month, for example. That boy she’s gittin’ hitched to is dumb as a bag of rocks an’ twice as ugly. She’s gonna need one very talented photographer to make those pictures come out decent ‘nuf to hang on a wall. Pick yo’self somethin’ an’ stick wit’ it.

Lighting Is The Most Important Aspect Of Photography

Without light, all you have is a picture of the dark and no one finds that interesting

Eyes down here, folks. I don’t know why ya’ll keep gettin’ so distracted by the pictures. Ya’ll know dang good and well yo’momma would tan’ yo’ hide if’n she caught you takin’ pictures like that. Ol’ Chuck’s diff’rent. He’s too old for it to matter. The rest of ya’ll, tho’, be needin’ to keep yo’ eyes in yo’ head. Ya’ gotta learns to be proFESSional and not be distracted by boobs an’ such.

Back to the subject at hand, light is the most important part of photography. Ya’ can’t take pictures of nothin’ in the dark. That’d just be silly now, wouldn’t it. Besides, I done know half ya’ll city slickers be ‘fraid of the dark in the first place. Ya’ll wouldn’t know what to do if ya’ got a picture of the boogey man now, would ya’? So, ya’ gotta have some light turned on some place or else the picture just ain’t gonna turn out the way ya’ want. Git that through that li’l pea brain of yo’rs. Ya’ gotta turn a light on somewhere.

Now, ol’ Chuck likes whatcha call that there “natural light.” That is, he shoots where the sun be shinin’. He don’t even use no flash or nuthin’ most the time. Me, I prefer crankin’ up the generator and usin’ some big ol’ strobe lights so that everything is all lit up nice an’ pretty like Chris’mas. Either way’ll work if’n ya’ be careful. Just don’t go draggin’ no ‘lectrical cord through a mud puddle, though. That’ll give ya’ quite a shock there an’ ain’t none of yo’r kin gonna want to be yo’r assistant no mo’.

Posing Is The Most Important Part Of Photography

charles i. letbetter - free photography course on one page

Knowing how to pose your subject makes the difference between a great shot and a stupid one

If’n yo’ takin’ pictures of peoples, then gittin’ ’em to stand the right way is the other most important part of photography. This is called posin’. No, DeWayne, it ain’t got nuthin’ to do with those folks walkin’ ’round with their britches saggin’ below their drawers. We be callin’ those folks “urBane” now, or somethin’ like that. Posin’ has to do with how yo’ subject be standin’ or sittin’ or whatever. Ya’ gotta be payin’ attention to this stuff or else the pictures be turnin’ out lookin’ like the stuff ya’ be shovlin’ out of Merle’s dairy barn.

Now, posin’ standin’ ain’t exactly like how ya’ll might be normal standin’. Ya’ gotta make it interestin’. Like, standin’ with one leg lookin’ like it done got stepped on by Pete’s bull. No, DeWayne, that does NOT mean ya’ll can go around stompin’ on people’s feet. Didn’t yo’ momma teach ya’ll no better’n that? Whatcha gotta do is go lookin’ at them there fashiony magazines an’ seein’ how them pretty ladies in them magazines be posin’. Pauline’s gotta stack of ’em down there in her hair Say-lon. She don’t mind ya’ lookin’ at ’em as long as ya’ keep the stack neat’n tidy.

Ol’ Chuck says ya’ can hire some help who done knows how to pose folk. They be called “art di-rectors” or somethin’ like that. I suppose they be walkin’ ’round with paint brushes in their pocket or somethin’. I ain’t never met one so I can’t rightly say.

Editing Is The Most Important Part Of Photography

Without editing, a photo is just a picture you took of something

Now, once ya’ done takin’ the pictures, ya’ gotta do this thing called editing before ya’ can show them to anyone. Take this here picture of ol’ Chuck, for instance. We both know dang good and well that there’s no way anyone’s gonna git Chuck up on no space ship. He done gone an’ used PHOTOshop to make it look like he was out in Jedi-land, where ever that is. Ya’ see, that PHOTOshop thing is mighty powerful stuff an’ ifn’ ya’ gots them computer smarts ya’ can do just ’bout anything with a picture that ya’ want.

Once upon a time, back when Chuck ‘n me were jus’ pups, folks used to have to do this editin’ stuff the hard way in what was called a dark room. It weren’t actually really dark in there, of course, we wouldn’t be able to see what we was doin’. There was a red light bulb in there and ya’ had to dip the picture in all these strange chem’cals an’ hang it up to dry like June’s laundry out there on the line. Took forever, it did.

Ya’ll be lucky now, tho, all ya’ll gots them computers an’ yo’ wifi an’ I’m tellin’ ya, there’s magic in them there boxes. Ya’ll can edit jus’ bout anything into anywhere if’n ya’ know what yo’ doin’. DeWayne, ya’ might as well go ahead and find yo’self a tudor or somethin’ to help ya’ figger it all out. Not all ya’ll the brightest bunch of bulbs in the box.

Post Everything To Facebook

charles i. letbetter - free photography education on one page

Facebook is where everything happens so you should always put all your pictures there

Once ya’ll got all them there pictures edited, then ya’ gotta post ’em all to Facebook. This is a re-QUIRE-ment ‘cuz there ain’t no way folks are ever gonna see none of those pictures if’n ya’ jus’ leave ’em sittin’ on yo’r computer there. Now, ol’ Chuck is sittin’ over here shakin’ his head for some reason. I’m not sure he’s feelin’ all that well. But trust me on this, no one is gonna know that yo’r bein’ a photographer now if’n ya’ don’t be postin’ yo’r pictures on the Facebook.

Now, I know some folks be postin’ all their stuff to this other thing called the Instagram. I sup’ose that might be okay if’n ya’ want to be lookin’ like one of them there spoiled li’l brats out in HolLYwood. I myself ain’t found much use for the thing. It keeps tryin’ to make all my pictures square and look funny. B’sides that, most people who be usin’ the Instagram be takin’ pictures of themselves, ya’ know, what they be callin’ selfies. Vanity is what it is, ya’ know, takin’ all them pictures of yo’r own face. Ain’t nobody need to see that many pictures of yo’r own face. Vanity is what it is. Heard the preacher say so jus’ the other Sunday.

This here concludes my photography lesson. I was gonna give ya’ll a test but Chuck is sayin’ we ain’t got time for that. So, I’m jus’ gonna go ‘head and DEclare ya’ll gradjuates of the Mortimier Chunkendunck Skool of Photography. Ya’ll is now o-fish-ally photographers. Good luck to ya’. Jus’ don’t be tryin’ to steal an of my customers.

Advertising / Fashion / Social Commentary

Personalized Shopping Could Get A Bit Creepy

October 24, 2016

charles i. letbetter - personalized shopping

I’m a champion for personal differences. All society should be much more personalized. —George M. Church

charles i. letbetter - personalized shopping could get a bit creepy

Having your total shopping experienced personalized to you sounds like a good thing until you read the small print

Please allow me to paint a scenario for you.

Imagine that you woke up this morning with a bit of a sniffle. As the seasons change, your allergies are acting up a bit; nothing serious but you should probably pick up some over-the-counter medication on your way to work. You down a cup of coffee and toast a bagel before heading out the door. Stopping at the convenient drug store just down the street, you pick up the allergy medication and your favorite candy bar. Work is stressful, as Mondays so often are, and you welcome the chance to get out of the office at lunch time. You decide to do a little shopping to cheer yourself up.

Walking into a department store just two doors down from your office, the first thing you see are some cute sweaters that would be perfect for wearing to work. You look for the price and a small LED screen tells you the sweater is 50% off the regular price. You can’t beat a deal like that. As you pick up a sweater in your size, your favorite song comes on the store’s music system. Paying for the sweater with the store’s credit card generates another 10% off the price and you’re beginning to feel as though this was a great bargain. The clerk hands you the receipt and on the back is a coupon for a bag full of your favorite candy bar.

You have just enough time to grab something to eat and when you enter the sidewalk cafe the waiter immediately suggests the vegetable soup, emphasizing its healthy properties. Finished with the soup, you return to work and get a call from your trainer at the gym. He suggests you stop by on your way home because, you know, Mondays are so very stressful.

A Highly Personalized Life

According to Joseph Turow, a professor of communication at the University of Pennsylvania, that highly personalized life experience is possibly less than a year away. His upcoming book, The Aisles Have Eyes comes out in January and covers the details of how and why all this personalization is happening. In an interview with Kaveh Waddell for The Atlantic magazine, Turow explains not only the upside of personalization but also the creepy dangers of living in such a connected world. Walking into a store and immediately finding what you want at a price you can afford sounds wonderful, but the details behind how that happens can be a bit disconcerting.

Of course, most of us already know that everything we do online is being tracked dozens of different ways. Every website you visit, every click you make, every product over which you briefly drool is noticed by something, somewhere, and that information is stored in a database for later influence. As a result, when another website feels the time is right, an ad pops up for that exact same product, touting a new, lower price. We get it. We know we’re being watched and our data is being collected.

What we’ve not realized, perhaps, is that it is not just our online activity that is being tracked. Everything we do is being noted by some app connected to some database. Our cell phones are most often the culprit. One app recognizes a sneeze and knows you may need coupons for a cold medicine. Another notices that you are driving more aggressively to work, indicating that you’re likely stressed even before you get there. Four different apps notice the purchase you make at the drug store and send an alert to the waiter at the cafe you just entered, suggesting that you might like the soup. It’s all possible, right now.

Nothing You Do Is Secret

Author George Orwell warned us about the constant oversight of a government he referred to as “Big Brother.” What Orwell didn’t imagine is that we would have apps and “reward” cards that collect far more information about us and our habits than his “Big Brother” could ever dream. Even more astonishing to Orwell is that we would hand over such information willingly. No one requires us to download the apps or accept the “reward” cards. We do so in the hopes of perhaps getting a bit of a discount on the things we buy.

Is a 10% discount worth giving up a lot of privacy? Apparently, we tend to think so. Rarely does anyone opt out of information gathering, especially once they’ve started using a program. For example, I just received my AARP card last week because I’m even older than Luke Perry. The card comes with a long list of “benefits” that include discounts for a lot of the things old people like me are apparently supposed to do, such as eat out and take trips. I read the small print, though. Anytime I use the card for a discount, AARP collects that information. They note not only which restaurant I dine at, but how much I spend. If I eat at a chain facility in multiple cities, that gets noticed as well. Over time, they are able to build a profile of my activities, which in turn, allows them to better “personalize” my “benefits.”

Do I mind AARP having that information? Not especially, because the presumption is that they use the information to my benefit. However, they also sell that information to “partners.” I would like to presume that those “partners” are equally safe, but how would we know? What are my options if one of those “partners” uses that information to start sending me spam? What if my health insurance rates go up because they see that what I’m eating probably isn’t helping my blood pressure a damn bit? Yeah, we might have a problem here.

The Potential For Abuse

While we all like the convenience of having everything personalized for us, the reality is that the information we give up could be used against us as well. From the article comes this question and answer:

Waddell: Is it legal for an advertiser or a retailer to decide, based on someone’s profile, like their race, that they’re higher risk and perhaps not show them certain goods?

Turow: Sure! Of course. They’ll never say that it’s because of race—and they wouldn’t do it just because of race. They’d do it because of, say, income. If you have the money, it doesn’t matter what race you are, from their standpoint—but race gets built in by virtue of where people live, their income brackets, and other things that are much less obvious.

I think age is going to be a major factor. It already is, among retailers. Income is going to be a big factor. And things that we don’t even think about, various concatenations of lifestyles that lead to certain predictions about what you will or will not read, or when you will or will not take a vacation, or if you will or will not have certain frequent-flier miles.

The ability to run through thousands of datapoints about you and compare them with thousands of datapoints about people you don’t even know, and then come up with a sense of what you will buy or not buy at what price: That’s the goal. The goal is to come up with a price for you that you accept based on the product they think you would want.

Personalization is great when it works in your favor, but we have to remember that all businesses need to make a profit. Therefore, they’re inherently going to look for ways to turn everything in their favor more than ours. If that means denying some people access to certain goods and services, then that is exactly what they’re going to do.

The Internet Of Things

Kat and I were watching last night’s episode of Madame Secretary before she left for school this morning. As part of the storyline where the family is being stalked, all of their “smart” appliances are hacked. The family becomes frightened when they realize that not even the presence of a physical security detail can protect them from someone taking control of the lights, the heat, and the appliances in their home.

When you hear people talking about “The Internet of Things,” they’re talking about how everything in our lives is becoming interconnected. Our appliances, the lights in our house, the heat, our phones, our insurance, and our shopping. Everything we do becomes a datapoint somewhere that connects to something else that connects to somewhere else. So, if your income is low and you show a history of having difficulty paying your bills, maybe an app starts shutting off the lights rather than leaving them on for hours on end, or adjusts the thermostat so you use less energy. Maybe your local grocery won’t sell you that big box of fried pies because they know you’re borderline diabetic. Perhaps the price on that pair of boots you like suddenly shoots up and is now more than you have the ability to cover.

Even worse, as events last week demonstrated, what happens when all our data gets hacked? There is no such thing as a totally safe database. That means the more information we allow people to collect, the more at risk we are of that information being stolen and used against us.

No, that’s not creepy at all, is it? Get ready, though. I don’t see any way to stop this phenomenon from happening, short of everyone on the planet unplugging and going back to binary means of commerce. Something tells me none of us are willing to do that. So, bend over and lube up. We’re not only getting screwed, we’re asking for it. Don’t worry, though; it’s all personalized.

Fashion / PotD

You Are Paying To Enslave Children

October 24, 2016

charles i. letbetter - could our children become slaves

Let us put our minds together and see what life we can make for our children. —Sitting Bull

charles i. letbetter - You Are Paying To Enslave Children

We want our children to have wonderful lives, but not every child is so lucky

I came across an article this morning from Darragh MacIntyre of the BBC program, Panorama. I’m going to quote him rather heavily, starting with this:

I’d been told that child labour was endemic in Turkey. But I wasn’t prepared for the reality of it. Or the scale of it. One basement workshop was almost entirely staffed with children, many of whom couldn’t have been more than seven or eight years old, the very picture of Dickensian misery.

We’ve talked about this before here and here, both just months ago. While fast fashion retailer H&M got a bit riled that we dare to mention them in an article, no one else really seemed to care. Neither article received many reads, no shares, hardly even a shrug. If I didn’t know better, I might get the impression that those of you reading don’t give a damn about the plight of children.

And maybe you don’t care. At least, not about those children. After all, we are too often talking about refugee children. In this particular case, the focus is on Syrian refugee children. We’ve already, as a country, fumbled the political football on that situation. As millions of families, many with very small children, continue to flee cities such as Aleppo, will we similarly fail them as they rush headlong into economic situations where child labor is their only hope for survival?

Look at the pictures of that previous baby above. She’s six-years-old now and enjoying first grade. She’s lucky. She’s white. She’s American. She’s well cared for. But not every child is so fortunate.

Is This Our Problem?

From the BBC:

It was just before 08:00. A group of people had gathered on a street corner on the outskirts of Istanbul, all desperate for a day’s work. …

We filmed through the blacked-out windows of our van a dozen yards away as a middleman picked this day’s workforce, selecting them one by one. Those who were chosen boarded a bus to take them to a factory.

We know now that up to seven of the workers on board were Syrian refugees. One was just fifteen. Another, we’ll call him Omar, was our source.

Later that evening, Omar met up with me. He showed me the labels from the clothes he’d been working on, that day. I recognised them instantly. So would you. The brand could hardly be better-known in the UK.

Americans are very good at looking at such stories and responding curtly with, “That’s not my problem.” Unless it is happening quite literally in our own backyard, we distance ourselves from any problems or issues that anyone else in the world might be having. We are, as a society, extremely well versed in this sort of denial.

So whose problem is this? If it is not ours, since we’re the one buying the clothes and demanding that there be more and more of them every time we shop, then where does the blame lie? Do we fault Syria for having a horrendous leader with no qualms about killing his own people? Should we blame Turkey, whose recent crackdown has made it even more difficult for refugees to find work there? Or do we blame the fashion labels whose names appear on the collars for the clothing being sewn together by these young children?

Certainly, there is plenty enough blame to go around for everyone to take a share. What’s missing is anything resembling responsibility.

How Bad Could It Be?

As we discovered with our articles earlier this year, if one names a brand and calls them out for contracting suppliers that use child/slave labor, they get quite upset. They’ll tell you about their inspections and how rigidly they monitor the companies who sew their clothes. However, consider what Mr. MacIntyre discovered:

All the brands I contacted about this programme say they regularly inspect the factories making their clothes to guarantee standards. Some of these audits are unannounced. But the Syrian boys explained how the factories got round this problem.

When the auditors arrive, they are hidden out of sight. And when the auditors leave, they go back to work. As simple as that. Some of the brands acknowledge the inherent failings in the auditing process and are now trying to tie up with trade unions and NGOs to combat abuses.

Other factories may never be visited by auditors because as far as the brands are concerned, they don’t make their clothes. They’re part of the chain of sub-contractors who make up much of the garment industry in Turkey.

They take orders from so-called first-tier factories – official suppliers to the brands – but often without the knowledge of the brands themselves.

This is where you’ll find the worst abuses of Syrian refugees and children. We decided to follow delivery vans from one of the first-tier factories hoping they would lead us down their supply chain.

Our plan was successful but also darkly disappointing. We filmed outside one of the sub-contractors as a small boy carried and dragged bags of material as big as himself to one of the vans. He couldn’t have been more than 12.

Twelve-years-old. Are you good with that? Does it bother you in the least that the very garment you are wearing right now was very likely pieced together by a child who should have been in middle school? Sure, there are laws, and there are inspections so that labels and retailers have plenty of excuses for saying that their clothes are not part of the problem. But as the BBC investigation discovers, at least some of those inspections are practically meaningless. They might disrupt a plant’s production for a few minutes, but they don’t prevent children from being continuously employed when they should be in school.

It Couldn’t Happen Here, There Are Laws

As Americans, we find it far too easy to sit back in our comfortable chairs, in our nice, warm homes, wearing our comfortable clothes, and think that we are immune. Certainly, nothing like what we see in Turkey could ever happen here. Our kids are safe. There are laws.

Funny, there are laws against child labor in Turkey, too. There were similar laws in Syria. When the people in charge of a country don’t care about those laws, however, they are easily ignored. When profit is given a higher regard than humanity, this is the result. For all the talk about how wonderful a “free market” is and how that government should stay the hell out of business concerns, Turkey shows us what happens when a “free market” is not sufficiently regulated.

Stop and think about all the rhetoric you’ve heard during this election cycle, not only from the Republican candidate but just as fervently from the Libertarian candidate. Both are quite sure that we need less government oversight, that regulation is strangling our ability to compete internationally. Why? Because American companies are punished, severely, if they employ twelve-year-olds. American companies are fined and sometimes forced to close if they do not pay their employees a minimum wage that is already well below a livable level. Both teh Republican and Libertarian candidates would happily remove any and all restrictions from American manufacturers so that they could “better compete in an international market.”

So yes, the very thing that we see happening in Turkey could happen here. There are far too many people who would support that kind of “free market” thinking.

Moral Obligations

One final quote from the article:

Our evidence confirms that big fashion brands are profiting from refugees and their children. All the brands involved say they are completely opposed to child labour and any exploitation of Syrian refugees.

But our investigation shows they sometimes don’t know how or where their clothes are being made. And until the brands know exactly who is making their clothes, then this type of exploitation is almost certain to continue.

Fashion brands hold a lot of the moral obligation for making sure their clothes are being assembled under the proper conditions, that employees are being paid a just and livable wage and that children are in school where they belong. If the inspections are not working, and they’re obviously not, then different means need to be found or different providers need to be contracted to ensure that no child/slave labor is involved in assembling any piece of clothing, anywhere, ever.

At the same time, though, we have a moral obligation as consumers to help put an end to this nonsense. We have to pay attention to where our clothes are being made. It doesn’t matter if you’re paying $2500 for a dress or $25 for its knockoff, both are just as likely to have been assembled in a sweatshop. There is no reason to tolerate this situation, and the more than we do the more pressure we put on legitimate and honest manufacturers to cheat as well. When domestic companies are not able to compete with ridiculously low wages, they place political pressure on our leaders to remove the restrictions that keep them from doing exactly the same.

We have been extremely fortunate over the past hundred years or so that our children don’t have to worry about being enslaved by a manufacturer. That situation could change in a heartbeat with your vote. If we elect a President and a Congress that is committed to removing government regulations, or ignoring the ones already in place, we end up with employers who are exactly like those in Turkey.

Your children, your grandchildren, could become slaves.

I don’t know how to put it any more blunt than that. The situation is right there in front of your face. Americans hold a responsibility not only to our children but to children around the world. We cannot allow this continue, whether in Turkey or Bangladesh, and we certainly cannot allow it to begin, again, in the US.

The solution starts with your vote. Vote carefully.

Current Issues / PotD

Sleeping Right Through History

October 23, 2016

Never under any circumstances take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night. —Dave Barry

When we sleep through historic events, what we are missing is the chance to tell a story

Won for the ages: After years of waiting and suffering, Cubs are in World Series declared the banner headline on this morning’s Chicago Tribune. The excitement is palpable across social media. It’s been 75 years since the baseball’s Chicago Cubs played in a World Series, even longer since they actually won one. There was yelling, screaming, and excitement all over the place.

I slept right through it.

This isn’t the first time I’ve slept through history. I missed the first Apple commercial in 1984. I missed Bill Clinton’s appearance on the Arsenio Hall show in 1992. The Supreme Court decision that decided the 2000 election? Yep, I was asleep when that came down. Slept right through Saddam Hussein’s capture in 2003 as well. Sleeping through history is something I’ve become quite good at doing, and I’m reasonably sure that I’m not the only one who does so. I know because Kat was sleeping right next to me when the Cubs won last night.

On some level, sleeping through historic events is common. After all, we have to sleep. We can’t always anticipate that something historic is going to happen. The Cubs have been letting us down and choking on the big game for 75 years. What reason was there to think that last night would be any different?

At the same time, though,sleeping through events of global importance deprives us of one of the most exciting experiences in the human condition: telling a story.

Culling Through History

A fair portion of the time, we have good reason to sleep through what is being called a historic event. When something is actually happening, we don’t always know if it is something that history is going to bother remembering. For example, when we think of school shootings the one that continues to be the most important, historically, is Columbine. Why? The country was shaken to its core. We, collectively, had never imagined that such a thing was even possible. However, there has been 31 school shooting since Columbine. Each, in their own way, could claim some historical significance, but history itself doesn’t remember them because they became too commonplace.

Historic events are sometimes obvious. The assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and John Lennon, for example. The Challenger explosion would be another. Certainly, the events of 9/11 fall into that category. Something so massive, so startling, is immediately etched in our brains the moment they happen we know they’re important.

Others, however, sneak up on us when we’re not paying attention. As Hurricane Katrina approached the Gulf Coast, forecasters attempted to warn residents, and the government, that this storm was stronger than anything we’d seen before. Too many people didn’t listen. Governors didn’t listen and force evacuations that could have saved lives. The federal government didn’t listen and as a result, aid was slow in arriving. Citizens of affected areas didn’t listen to the warnings, tried riding out a storm that couldn’t be ridden. Because we weren’t expecting the hurricane to be historic, the nation tried sleeping through it and was knocked right out of our comfortable beds.

Perhaps we can be forgiven for sleeping through some historic events. Our lives are full trying to handle every-day events. We are too tired to handle the big stuff. When we sleep through moments of great significance, though, we miss out on more than we expect.

Living To Tell The Tale

I remember talking with my father about the events of December 7, 1941. He was still a child on that fateful morning, but he still remembered quite clearly the response of those around him: everyone was scared. The men were torn. They shared a farm and if they all joined the military, which they were inclined to do, then who would handle the 500 acres that provided the only source of income for five families? Those with older children were concerned about sending them off to fight an unfamiliar enemy. Since news moved much slower during that era, anxiety ran high as the future of the nation seemed uncertain.

Being alive when a historic event takes place doesn’t always change our own lives directly. We don’t always see things then as they turn out. I remember the Watergate Scandal, for example. The only way in which it directly affected my life was that the televised hearings preempted my afternoon cartoon shows. I was less upset that the President of the United States had committed a crime and more pissed off that I was missing Popeye the Sailor and Roadrunner. I remember watching Hank Aaron break Babe Ruth’s homerun record. While it was exciting, there was also a sense of relief. Network news programs had regularly interrupted whatever was showing every time Aaron came up to bat for what seemed like a month (it was only a few days) before he hit that ball. We were glad the constant interruptions were over.

Regardless of our perspective on an event, however, we still come away with a story that is worth telling. If anything, it is the wide-ranging differences of our perspectives that making listening to those stories so great. We can get the historical facts of an event from any history book or a quick bit of research on the Internet. To truly understand the emotion of an event, though, we need to listen to the stories of the people who witnessed those events. Without those stories, our understanding of history is rather empty and void of context.

Our Own Historical Record

One of my favorite radio programs is the Moth Radio Hour. The Moth isn’t a news program and it’s not really a matter of commentary, either. The Moth is people telling stories, real stories, not fiction, in front of a live audience. These stories relate to us things that happened around historic events in people’s lives. While the event itself might not have made the news, it was important to the history of the person telling the story. So, an astronaut explains what it feels like to be in space for the first time. Another story is a woman telling about her search for her signature scent. A military veteran relates the rigors of Honor Guard training.

All the stories we tell are important to history because it is our stories, the explanations of how we felt, what we saw, how we were affected, that gives context and meaning to the cold, dry facts of history. If the generations that come after us are to learn any lessons from the history that has come before them, they need more than history books. They need our stories, yours and mine, to give them a sense of why an event was so very important and why they need to pay attention and learn.

What happens when we do not tell those stories? Our history is empty. We know events occurred, but we fail to understand them. We know the fight for civil rights was challenging, but we don’t understand that battle until we listen to the stories of people like John Lewis, who was there next to Dr. King, who was arrested and beaten, who was sprayed with the fire hoses. We know the dustbowl era affected migration to California, but to hear my Uncle Fred tell about his decision to pack up and move injects the sorrow and pain of that momentous event make the experience real.

We need these stories.

Sharing Our Own History

When it’s all said and done, the fact that I slept right through last night’s game is probably not significant to the global understanding of history. Baseball and I aren’t that close. Other events, though, require that I stay awake. The evening of November 8 would be a good example. No matter how one slices it, this election has important historical significance. We need to be awake not just because we need to know the outcome. We need to be paying attention because there will come a day when our stories will be an important part of the historical narrative of our country.

Sharing our stories, whether through the centuries-honored oral tradition or through creating a video for social media, is an important part of history. We need more than dates and numbers and names. Those who come behind us need to know why we vote the way we do, how our lives are affected, and how we adjust our plans based on the outcome. History is not something we watch happen. History is something we experience, even if it is passive.

We need to stay awake. Our stories are important. Make sure you tell yours.

science / Social Commentary

Creatives & Addiction: Rethinking Our Approach

October 22, 2016

Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism. —Carl Jung

charles i. letbetter - creative & addiction: re-thinking our approach

Recent changes in the definition of addiction should have us re-thinking how we respond to addicts. [photo concept and makeup by Sasha Starz]

I’m not sugar-coating this one for you: addiction among creatives is too common and too frequently undiagnosed. Even when it is diagnosed, it has previously been almost impossible to “cure.” Some handle it better than others, but we’ve lost too many, from Janis Joplin to Amy Winehouse and, apparently, even Prince. And those are just the names you recognize. I’ve seen addiction in photographers old and young, ruining creative lives before their full vision is ever realized. Writers seem to be especially prone to addiction. I’ve had several tell me they couldn’t even start to write without being high or being drunk.

I’ve always taken a hard line in my attitude toward addicts. I don’t like them. I don’t want them around. Addiction is something I’ve always seen as a weakness, a fundamental flaw in one’s character. If you know you have a problem with something, stay away. Understanding how anything can control someone to such a fatal degree is not something I’ve been able to do. I try to be sympathetic for those struggling, but I tend to blame them for their own problems.

Now, the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) has me re-thinking my disdain for addicts. As it turns out, taking such a hard line has probably been exactly the opposite of what those people have needed. Shoving them into rehab facilities might not have been as productive as we thought. 12-step groups could possibly be completely misdirected.

Maybe we were all wrong.

A New Definition

Addiction is a chronic brain disorder and not simply a behavior problem involving alcohol, drugs, gambling or sex. That’s the direction the ASAM is now taking in regard to addiction. Stop and think about that for a moment. Addiction is a chronic brain disorder. Let that sink in. All these years, we’ve been looking at addiction as a character flaw, perhaps a psychological psychosis brought about by some childhood trauma or something. We have ultimately looked at addiction as a choice one makes and faulted them for making that choice.

Here’s the first part of the ASAM’s short definition of addiction:

Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Dysfunction in these circuits leads to characteristic biological, psychological, social and spiritual manifestations. This is reflected in an individual pathologically pursuing reward and/or relief by substance use and other behaviors.

Make special note of the use of the word “chronic.” That’s important. “Chronic” puts addiction is the same class as heart disease and diabetes. “Chronic” means that it’s not going to go away. Either one deals with addiction their entire life, religiously, continually, or they risk dying. There is no cure. There is only treatment and without that treatment, the disease gets worse.

Obviously, there’s some disagreement with this definition. Therapeutical psychologists, the folks who make their living getting one to lie on their couch at $500 an hour, don’t care much for this definition because it means their attempts to treat addiction as a psychosis is misdirected. One is not an addict because their father slapped them when they were four-years-old or because they didn’t get the bicycle they wanted when they were seven. Instead, genetic factors are responsible about half the time. We’ve been looking at this totally wrong.

A Personal Story

Mark Cummings was one of the best young photographers I ever knew. We first met out on assignment, both of us covering the same event for different entities. He was sharp, funny, and had an incredible eye for seeing things that everyone else was missing. He noticed, for example, that one particular Senator from Oklahoma always had his shoes untied. Always. He caught the look of burnout in a young pop star whose label was pushing her too hard. Mark infuriated editors because he didn’t capture the image they wanted to see. Instead, he captured a dark reality that was unnerving.

Mark also had an addiction to alcohol. He carried a flask of whiskey in his camera bag. Always. He would have another in his car, a third in his suitcase, and kept a bottle hidden in his office. Mark started the day with a shot of whiskey in his coffee, then dropped the coffee by 10. In the three years that I knew him, I don’t think I ever saw him sober. He was functional. He took fantastic pictures. Mark Cummings was never sober.

Cummings wasn’t one to admit he’d had too much. Truth was, most days he was over the legal blood alcohol limit by noon. One evening, after being yelled at for over an hour by his editor for “wasting” five rolls of film and not getting anything printable, Mark was “extra thirsty.” When I saw him, he was already six glasses in. I stayed for two more and tried to get him to share the cab ride home with me. He wouldn’t leave.

I received the phone call early the next day. About three hours after I left, and who knows how much more whiskey, Mark put his head down on the bar, fell off his bar stool, and died from alcohol poisoning. Another brilliant photographer, gone.

Understanding The Problem

Again, quoting from the long definition of addiction from the ASAM:

Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.

Understand, two decades of neurological research have gone into formulating this definition. Mark, along with every other creative addict we’ve known, was repeatedly told he had “a problem.” What he should have been told was that he had a neurological disease, one for which there is no cure, only treatment. I can’t say that would have saved Mark. He was stubborn, as a log of addicts are. It would have, however, made a difference in how everyone responded to him.

The causes of addiction are worth noting as well. Again, from ASAM:

When persons with addiction manifest problems in deferring gratification, there is a neurological locus of these problems in the frontal cortex. Frontal lobe morphology, connectivity and functioning are still in the process of maturation during adolescence and young adulthood, and early exposure to substance use is another significant factor in the development of addiction. Many neuroscientists believe that developmental morphology is the basis that makes early-life exposure to substances such an important factor.

There’s a lot more that I encourage you to read on the ASAM website.

Our Response Is Part Of The Solution

Dr. Michael Miller, past president of ASAM who oversaw the development of the new definition, states, “… we have to stop moralizing, blaming, controlling or smirking at the person with the disease of addiction, and start creating opportunities for individuals and families to get help and providing assistance in choosing proper treatment.”

When I think of all the times we’ve gotten it wrong, I want to cry. We blamed Mark for being a drunk, for not taking responsibility for his “habit.” His boss tried to control Mark’s drinking by pairing him with writers who would confiscate any alcohol they found. People would laugh at him when he couldn’t stand or took pictures too blurred to tell what they were. Every last one of those responses was wrong.

We have to change our way of thinking about addiction. If someone has a stroke you don’t laugh at them, do you? Should a friend you’re with suddenly have a heart attack, are you going to tell them they need to do something about that problem and walk away? No, you help them get help. Addicts are exactly the same. While the choice to get help is ultimately their own, we have to guide them toward professionals who genuinely understand the problem. While a 12-step program might help, they need a lot more than just a weekly meeting or two.

The ASAM states:

Recovery from addiction is best achieved through a combination of self-management, mutual support, and professional care provided by trained and certified professionals.

Each year, we lose too many wonderfully creative people to addiction. Help them get help. The ASAM can help connect you or a friend with the appropriate professional. Let’s stop treating addiction as just “a problem” and treat it like the disease that it is. Let’s do more to save our addicted friends. The world needs their creativity.

Photography / PotD

Photography Nightmares: What We’re Really Thinking

October 22, 2016

I told my therapist I was having nightmares about nuclear explosions. He said don’t worry it’s not the end of the world. —Jay London

Photographers love most of our clients, but the nightmares come when unreasonable requests are made

We like you. We really, really like you. Photographers love their clients, especially repeat clients who keep coming back for portraits or other special imagery. We love clients who understand the value of what we do, who don’t keep needling us when it takes longer than expected to finish their pictures, and especially the ones who tell their friends that they need to use us as well. These are the people for whom we might consider bending the rules every once in a while, and for whom we’ll at least consider their more outrageous requests.

Then, there are the nightmares. These are the clients who are never satisfied with their pictures, the ones who question your quality, whether you even know what you’re doing, and claim that their four-year-old could do better. We stay up at night fearing the client who trashes us to their friends, but then comes back again and has the audacity to ask for a discount or special service that you don’t normally offer. These are not nice people.

Yet, as professionals, we are supposed to take the nightmares with a grain of salt, keep a smile on our face, and attempt to say no to their requests while re-directing them back to our stated policies. I was amused earlier this week when a sponsored article popped up in my Facebook newsfeed offering a chart with answers to the most common objections photographers face. The chart was created by Joy Vertz, a portrait photographer based in Mequon, Wisconsin. The advice she gives is solid. However …

What We Say Isn’t Always What We’re Thinking

Ms. Vertz is one of those lovely, positive, go-get-’em people who doesn’t take no for an answer. She smiles, redirects, restates, and closes the sale. She’s successful both in terms of her own photography business and also with helping other photographers who are struggling. I’ve never met her, but I’m sure she’s a wonderfully nice person who could sell a block of ice to a resident of the South Pole. Some people just have that right attitude for selling.

The rest of us, however, struggle with closing sales. Not all of us are natural-born salespeople. In fact, the more creative we are, the more difficult it can be for us to function in a business capacity. We work best when someone else handles all the sales closing stuff, leaving us to take the pictures and be creative and occasionally do some really amazing work. Dealing with anyone who is the slightest bit contrarian isn’t our strong point.

As I was reading through Ms. Vertz’s list of objections, I couldn’t help thinking, “Yes, that’s what you should say, but that’s not what I would be thinking.” I’m one of those people who does better when Kat closes the sale. She’s friendly, cheerful, and can keep a smile on her face even when talking to a complete idiot. I can’t. Stupid people make me want to throw things. So, I thought it might be fun, since it’s Saturday and if you’re reading this after 8:00 AM you’re probably not out shooting today, to consider what we would actually like to say to clients who cause us nightmares. The objections come from Ms. Vertz’s list. I don’t have time to address them all, but this should be enough to make my point.

You are too expensive. I can’t afford you.

Wrong. You don’t want to pay me for the value of my work. You want a discount. You always want a discount. Yet, you’ll pay $8 for that freakin’ latte you’re holding. You down what, three of those a day? I’m not too expensive, you just have really lousy priorities, are selfish, and fail to value anyone in the service industries. Go away. I don’t have time for you.

I just want a disk of images

Why? Because you want to share them online (which is fine if you’ve paid for the disc) or because you want to take them to the drug store and get really crappy prints instead of paying my prices? Or even worse, you’re not going to try printing them on your home inkjet, are you? After I’ve spent hours getting the tonal and color quality of your images just right, you’re going to ruin them by printing on some non-calibrated crappy little no-name printer you picked up at a garage sale? And then you’ll complain because the pictures don’t “look right.” Please.

Just put them online for us to look at

Damn, you’re lazy. If you think I’m going to wait around for months while you do everything but choose your proofs, you’re crazy. Make a decision already. Chances are you’re going to go with your first choice, anyway. Better yet, let me decide for you. You’re too distracted to pay attention to what you’re doing. You’re giving me a headache.

[By the way, Joy’s answer to this one is spot on: To have an online gallery is $500 which applies 100% to your order placed within 1 week. It is $25 for each additional week. ]

What is the cheapest way I can get an image for Facebook?

Take a fucking selfie like everyone else? Pay for a session and we’ll happily give you permission to use the finished photos online with appropriate credit. Re-edit the picture or fail to give credit, though, and I’m SO going to bitch. Okay, not really, but I’ll think bad thoughts about you and complain about you to my dog.

Can I see all the photos?

Uhm, no. Part of my job is to make you look good. You know, remove the blemishes from things like really bad acne, or removing those horrid dark circles from under your eyes because you don’t sleep, eat horribly, smoke like a fucking chimney, and drink three bottles of wine a night. You come here wanting me to make you look flawless and glamorous like a model. So no, I’m not showing you all the photos.

You don’t mind that I brought all of our cousins along, do you?

Uhm, YES! First of all, pull those kids off the props. This is not a fucking playground. Do I look like someone who has the patience of a preschool teacher? You do realize there’s no way I’m getting five toddlers all looking in the same direction at the same time, even if I had a puppy. I’m going to need half a bottle of scotch after we finish this one and you had damn well better buy the largest package we offer. Your child just peed on my carpet. I hate you.

We really love our clients.

Of course, we would never actually say any of those things to anyone’s face. We do our best to be polite and nice and not curse too much in front of children. At least two-thirds of our clients are really wonderful people. We enjoy working with them. However, we keep having nightmares. Every photographer I know has nightmares.

If you look on our home page, where we describe our services, we provide the instruction: Please be sure to communicate your needs fully to avoid any surprises. One of those surprises is that we will charge an additional fee to clients who are especially difficult. If someone is going to be a complete pain-in-the-ass, they’re going to pay for that experience.

Now you know what we’re thinking. Be a good client, not a nightmare. Thank you.

PotD / Social Commentary

I Think It’s About Forgiveness

October 21, 2016

The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong. —Mahatma Gandhi

Forgiveness is never easy, but it is forgiving ourselves that is perhaps the most difficult task of all.

Forgiveness is a challenging topic, and a rather sobering one for a Friday. Normally, I try to keep things a bit lighter as we head into the weekend, but my instinct, or my gut, or whatever you want to call that nagging voice in the back of my head tells me to go with it. We need forgiveness and we especially need to forgive ourselves.

This is important. I want my boys to see this not because of anything they’ve done but because, as humans, they will inevitably do something that lingers on their conscience. Forgiving ourselves is a lesson we are challenged to learn because we must first have a reason to learn it, and that reason is often painful.

Also, before we get too deep into the conversation, I want you to know that the examples I use here are intentionally fictional. I’m not throwing anyone under the bus, so to speak, and I’m certainly not inclined to make any great confessions of my own faults. Confession is good for the soul, but not for the Internet.

Let’s start, however, by taking a look at a new short film by the folks at Pixar. This isn’t the same fun, cheerful, feel-good type of film we usually see from the animation company. What we see here strikes a dark tone and, honestly, I’m not sure I would recommend it for young children unless you are ready, as a parent, to hold a serious conversation. The film runs a little over six minutes. Take a look:

Borrowed Time from Borrowed Time on Vimeo.

[This video source doesn’t always scale well for some mobile devices. If you’re having difficulty viewing the video, you can find the original on Vimeo]

We’ve All Been There, Sort Of

Borrowed Time is one of those poignant little films that one almost wishes were longer, but at the same time we’re rather glad it isn’t. Emotion that strong carried out for the length of a feature film would be difficult for a lot of people to handle. The short film is challenging enough. The producers behind the film wanted to quickly, briefly, drive home the point that it’s not only okay to forgive ourselves, but that forgiveness is necessary if we are to continue living.

We’ve been there. Okay, perhaps we didn’t accidentally kill our fathers as they clung desperately to the side of a cliff. We’ve done other things, though; things we shove to the back of our mind and try to not think about. Letting a dying aunt suffer in pain because you stole her Percoset. Beating up that little kid when you were eight-years-old because you were angry about being abused yourself. The night you let a drunk friend drive away and they killed someone with their car.

Those experiences, those moments of personal trauma, never really go away. You remember the look of pain, the pleading, in your victim’s eyes. Maybe you remember screams or cries for help. Or maybe you just remember the silence as you did nothing. We do our best to hide those memories. The past is the past. That all happened when you were young and didn’t know better. Yet, those pictures still haunt your mind. No one else in the world may know what you did, but you do. If you dare think about it very long you fear you’ll go mad.

Some Things We Can’t Fix

Recovery programs often include a step called “making amends,” doing something to make up for the wrong you’ve done in the past. The exercise is appropriate for some discrepancies, but there are some things we do, the really big things, that simply can’t be fixed, ever. Like the young man in the film, there’s no bringing his father back. We see the pain in his eyes, drawn beautifully by the Pixar animators, and know that he has replayed that scenario over and over in his mind, trying to find some way to fix it, looking for scenarios where his finger doesn’t find that trigger. There’s no changing what happened, though.

How do we get beyond this? How do we pick ourselves up and keep moving? For the man in the film, it was a matter of revisiting the site of that most horrible event, walking among the skeletons of dead horses and a decayed stage coach, feeling the desert wind, and finding his father’s watch. Everything happened in a neat package of six minutes. For most of us, however, forgiveness takes a little bit longer than six minutes.

Let me say right here that if you have a matter of guilt, justified or not, that is interrupting your life to a severe degree, seek professional help. You don’t have to do this on your own. Finding a path to forgiving yourself is not safe for everyone. If you’re prone to depression, have had thoughts of suicide or harming yourself, don’t address such emotional matters on your own. Don’t even try.

For the rest of us, though, there are multiple ways of finding your path to self-forgiveness.

Identifying What Really Happened

Memory is a tricky thing that loves to mix up the facts. The further removed we are from an event, the more likely it is that we are getting at least some of the facts wrong. This is why witness testimony is often unreliable. Our memories are easily influenced by external sources, including our dreams, and therefore unreliable.

So, before you continue beating yourself up over something, consider what actually happened. Get the facts straight. Try to understand what your motivations were at the time and how the circumstances participated in your action. Come to grips with the decisions you made and how the consequences of those decisions affected you and other people.

Only when we are totally honest with ourselves about what we did and why we did it can we begin to move forward. Again, this can be a very emotional and difficult step. Don’t be afraid to ask for professional help.

Mistakes Don’t Make You A Bad Person

There are few truly horrible people in the world. There are a lot of people whose actions are misunderstood and regrettable, but the number of genuinely murderous, maniacal beasts are actually small enough that you’re probably not among them. Unless you’re burying bodies in your backyard or somewhere, you have hope.

Society likes to label people and, especially throughout the 1980s and early 90s we, as a nation, were obsessed with labeling “bad guys.” The whole “three strikes” program that sentenced repeat felony offenders to life in jail, is a sad commentary of how quickly our society just gives up and throws people in the trash. The personal effect of that philosophy is that we become willing to throw ourselves away, also.

When you have someone tell you that YOU are valuable, they’re not just pandering to you. You are not a bad person. What you did might have been very wrong, but it does not rob you of your humanity. Even if you vote for the Republican nominee for President, as deplorable an act as that might prove to be, you are still not a bad person. You are capable of love and of being loved. Don’t every forget that.

You Can Start Over

Too many people feel that they cannot escape their pasts. Granted, sometimes making that jump is difficult. I can think of one acquaintance right now whose past is chasing him like a hound dog. He feels that he can’t catch a break because every time he turns around something he did in the past raises its ugly head and knocks him back down. When that happens you have but one move: start over.

Leave town. Change jobs. Go back to school and study something completely different. Select a radically different group of friends. Become someone who makes you proud. You can do it. This isn’t a new path that no one’s been down before. In fact, this path is so well-worn that it’s deep-rutted from use. Forgiveness means, at some level, shutting forever those doors to the past and making a conscious decision that you are moving on with your life.

Yes, starting over is scary. I get that. Again, we’ve been there. You can do it, though. You deserve this.

Learn From Your Mistakes

You’ve heard this advice before. Just as it applies to other less traumatic mistakes in our lives, it applies to the big stuff as well. Okay, so you totally blew it. Part of the forgiveness process is learning what to do differently so that we don’t make those mistakes again. Sure, we hope the circumstances that led to that error don’t re-occur. Part of learning may be knowing how to avoid the circumstances that put you in the position to do whatever you did wrong. Fate sometimes intervenes, however. You need to be ready.

Life throws us a lot of curves. We never know when a situation might arise that requires us to make a critical decision. One does not always have the luxury to sit and reason through the possibilities and possible consequences. When those moments come, it is our experiences that teach us how to respond. Those who have frequent mistakes in their lives are better equipped to know what not to do, which inherently puts them closer to the correct action.

What happened in the past can make you a better person today and into the future. We make better choices. We avoid dangerous circumstances. We are able to forgive ourselves and continue living.

Borrowed Time

Notice that I’ve not excused anyone’s behavior. The man in the short film was placed in a situation where any number of accidents could have occurred and a most horrible one did. Not everything bad that happens to us is an accident, though. When we intentionally make bad decisions there is no excuse.

What we must do instead is forgive. Not forget, mind you, but forgive. Forgiveness opens our souls, our consciousness so that we can move on and achieve great things. We diminish our potential when we bind ourselves with guilt. As humans, we are capable of truly amazing things when we remove all the obstacles that we place in front of ourselves. The process of forgiveness helps clear the way for us. We move on. The clock starts ticking again.

Time is elusive, though. Don’t wait. The longer we hold onto that guilt the tighter we bind ourselves.

Give yourself permission to live. Forgive.

Advertising / Photography / PotD / publishing

Paper’s Place In A Digital World

October 20, 2016

charles i. letbetter - paper is not dead

You can only generate ideas when you put pencil to paper, brush to canvas… when you actually do something physical. —Twyla Tharp

charles i. letbetter - paper's place in a digital world

We’ve been convinced that that world is going digital, but there’s still a place for paper that is larger than expected

I walk the dog every morning at 4:00 AM. Most mornings, it’s a nice, quiet stroll through the neighborhood. Everyone’s asleep. Well, almost everyone. Each morning, in about the same location, we pass a vehicle with its hazard lights flashing as the person on the passenger side flings copies of the Indianapolis Star out the window. The first time we encountered them I was rather surprised that there would be many people in this neighborhood who would still subscribe to the print edition of the newspaper. What I’ve learned since then is that no only do a lot of people subscribe to the print edition of the paper, they prefer it to the digital edition even on mornings like this where the paper is likely to be a bit soggy despite the plastic bag surrounding it.

Some fifteen or so years ago, a fair number of Americans, intelligent people who know how to reason and think critically, became enamored with and perhaps too easily accepted the idea that the future of all media lies in digital content and presentation. Everything was going to be online. The rush to do everything online was so great that many large businesses fell in its wake. Booksellers with hundreds of stores nationwide went out of business. Magazines with decades of experience either went online only or closed completely. The little film-developing kiosks that were once ubiquitous suddenly all disappeared. No more paper. Everything online.

What we’re beginning to realize, though, is that we still need paper.

Everyone’s Online Now, Aren’t They?

Those who make their living bringing companies and individuals online have long been evangelists for the digital movement and they have been very effective. Like the big tent Christian revivalists of the 20th century, they’ve made the rounds from company to company, boardroom to boardroom, warning that to remain with paper is certain death and that digital would be their economic salvation. Everyone drank the Kool-Aid. As a result, we are now seeing a shift at the top of corporations, especially in publishing fields. Consider some of the developments this week alone:

The New York Times named A. G. Sulzberger Deputy Publisher. No one was surprised. The paper has always been a family business and it is expected that the younger Sulzberger will eventually take over for his father and current publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. What made him the front-runner, though (two of his cousins were also considered for the job) was likely the fact that he chaired the team that, starting with their report in 2014, resulted in a complete digital transformation of the Grey Lady. The Times‘ seemingly successful shift to a digital-centric philosophy is seen as an example for other traditional media companies.
Condé Nast completely restructured its management team, placing everyone, including all publications, under the cooperative leadership of five executives. Jim Norton is now chief business officer, in charge of all revenue operations including sales, brand development, and consumer marketing. Edward Cudahy was promoted to chief technology officer, responsible for software engineering teams and tech operations. Anna Wintour was already artistic director over all Condé Nast publications, her success likely the motivation behind this recent set of consolidations. Christiane Mack is now head of content, strategy, and operations over all brands. Raul Martinez has been promoted to head of the creative group, leading both editorial creative and business-side creative as well as the company’s native advertising division 23 Stories. Critical to this re-alignment is an over-arching push to create better digital products across all brands. Pink slips for those who fall between the cracks could start going out as early as tomorrow.
Meanwhile, Time, Inc. announced yesterday that the UK edition of InStyle is closing its print edition and will be digital only by the first of the year. Again, more pink slips. The company is hoping that the move results in a 200 percent increase across all digital platforms by the end of 2017. They’re hoping that more video and 24-hour content management will be sufficient to accomplish their stated goals.
At the same time, the digital conversion of Style.com from a content site to an e-commerce site hasn’t been as smooth as the folks at Condé Nast would have liked. While the UK version launched earlier this year, the US version has lagged behind and still isn’t online. Luxury brands have yet to hop on board. The UK site’s mere 677,000 monthly hits is but a drop in the bucket compared to competitors such Yoox.com which boasts 9.8 million visits a month.

At a casual glance, it would appear that everyone’s sold on digital and there’s no significant market for paper.

But Wait, Not Everyone Wants Digital Content

With everyone rushing to jump online, some assumptions were made that, possibly, were not true. Primarily, print was declared prematurely dead. Paper, we were told, was out. Everything has to be online. That assumption, we’re finding out now, was not only premature, but very, very wrong.

The major piece of evidence in this argument is the paper, Reality Check: Multiplatform newspaper readership in the United States, 2007–2015 by Hsiang Iris Chyi & Ori Tenenboim, both from the University of Texas, Austin, School of Journalism. They make an indictment at the very beginning that is rather damning of this massive rush to kill paper and put everything on the web.

Results indicated that the (supposedly dying) print product still reaches far more readers than the (supposedly promising) digital product in these newspapers’ home markets, and this holds true across all age groups. In addition, these major newspapers’ online readership has shown little or no growth since 2007, and more than a half of them have seen a decline since 2011. The online edition contributes a relatively small number of online-only users to the combined readership in these newspapers’ home markets.

The same seems to hold true for those who declared that print books were deceased as well. Nielsen BookScan unit sales of print books rose 2.4 percent in 2014. Publisher’s Weekly reported earlier this year that bookstore sales for 2015 were up 2.5%, the first time that sector had seen an increase since 2007. Ebook sales actually declined, as did sales of book readers such as Amazon’s Kindle series.

Even in photography, where the push to put everything online has been nothing short of maddening, we’re seeing an increase in the number of articles such as this one (paid content by Canon) that tout the revenue advantages of selling prints, not digital images. Some even claim to be making half a billion dollars off print sales, though careful research finds that those claims are likely exagerated—by a lot. Still, the point is that the financial benefits of being exclusively online, or even predominantly digital, are quite possible overstated. Paper is far from dead.

How Is That Even Possible?

For starters, let’s consider the fact that, believe it or not, everyone in the United States does not have access to the Internet. Some 20% of American households are not “plugged in” in any way. Think globally, and that number jumps to a whopping 56%, over 4 billion people, without Internet. That means there are millions of Americans and billions of people around the world who are wholly dependent on print publications for their information.

Even beyond those numbers is the fact that a lot of people, especially those over 50 who were not raised with computer monitors in front of their faces all the time, don’t like reading material online. While Baby Boomers are no longer the largest generation on the planet, they are still extremely significant and, more than anything, set in their ways. We grew up reading printed newspapers and magazines and we like it that way. For many people my age and older, trying to read an article online actually hurts our eyes, especially when we’re looking at black letters on a white background. Paper doesn’t hurt our eyes the way those white pixels do.

Rural residents tend to prefer printed publications for local news, especially. Smaller cities and towns (anything under 500,000 population) are less served by online sources. Those communities are heavily reliant on the print edition of their local newspapers, even though, in most cases, an online edition is available. Local news is perceived as being easier to find in a print paper and keeps subscriber numbers at least steady. Eugene, Oregon’s Register-Guard is a good example of a local newspaper that is more valued for its print edition than its online presence.

There is also some evidence that those who would be considered under-educated, immigrants for whom English is a second language, those whose Internet access is limited to public-use facilities such as libraries all prefer print publications as their primary source of information.

Paper is so very far from dead.

Striking The Right Balance

For many publications, regardless of size, and for photographers and other visual artists as well, the argument between online and print often comes down to a matter of finances. Newspapers, especially, have seen a steady decline in print advertising. Ad agencies, and in some cases the publications themselves, have convinced advertisers that their ads get more views and a wider spread online than they do in print. That statement is not necessarily untrue.

However, the online concept is challenged when one considers the low conversion rate for online ads. We are all so horribly inundated with ads online that we ignore the vast number of them, even when they are for items for which we might have already expressed a need or want. Have you noticed that grocery stores still send their bulk mail ads on newsprint to your mailbox every week? There’s a good reason. People are more likely to shop at the store after seeing the ads in print versus viewing them online. Online advertisers have to generate hundreds of thousands of more views to generate an equal conversion rate to print ads. For many advertisers, especially small-market advertisers, print makes a lot more sense.

No one, from the New York Times to Joe Schmoe photography, is wise going with a single media solution. There’s no question that digital media is a powerhouse that everyone needs to embrace in some form or fashion. A well-designed website is still a must for every business and even more for anyone involved in any form of publishing. However, whether we’re talking about newspapers or photographs, there is still a tremendous need and market for print products. Where we need to focus more of our effort is in finding that balance that works both from a financial and customer service perspective.

Paper is far from dead. Chances are, if you glance around and see the clutter on your desk, most of that clutter is paper. We need paper a lot more than we think. Digital assistants such as Siri and Cortana are a long way from replacing Post-It notes. Even when I sign up for digital payment with my health insurance, they still send me three sheets of paper to confirm that the payment was received.

Perhaps we need to take a giant step back and reconsider our strategies. Paper is not an enemy. Ignoring it ignores a large number of customers, which means we’re leaving money on the table. I don’t know anyone who can afford that kind of strategy.

Art / Current Issues

Missing The World Summit On Arts & Culture

October 19, 2016

Our culture is more shaped by the arts and humanities than it often is by politics. —Jim Leach

charles i. letbetter - missing the world summit for arts & culture

Global discussions of arts and culture are taking place and the US is largely sitting on the sidelines

There is a conference taking place in Malta right now involving arts and culture organizations from all over the world. The World Summit On Arts And Culture includes participants from every populated continent, people dedicated wholly to preserving the future of the arts and the cultures they represent. Interestingly enough, this is one international program where the United States is sitting mostly on the sidelines. Yes, National Endowment for the Arts chairperson Jane Chu did speak this morning, but the only other American organization on the very full speaking schedule is Robert Lynch, CEO of Americans for the Arts late tomorrow. The conversation is very diverse with points of view from places whose cultures and arts have long been overlooked by the Western arts community.

From the summit’s website:

The focus of the 2016 World Summit on Arts and Culture, will be on Cultural Leadership in the 21st Century. The arts and culture can be considered to be at a crossroads – faced with many challenges and opportunities at the global, national and local level such as: the impact of new technologies on the production and distribution of cultural goods and services; threats to global security; new patterns of migration; changing contexts at the national level including austerity measures and continuous requests for reform; aspirations from artists and culture operators to extend their impact and outreach to other sectors, while also struggling to guarantee freedom of expression and ensure cultural diversity.

Relying On The Voice Of Others

I really can’t comment too terribly much beyond this point because I’M NOT THERE! Sigh. No one ever wants to send me to the fun stuff. I could volunteer to be shot at and be accepted right away, but offer to be involved in conversations about how photography factors in arts and especially non-Western cultures and nooooo, I’m still sitting here at home. Fortunately, though, those who are participating have been very active on social media, especially Twitter. There is also a discussion paper that covers many of the issues addressed today and tomorrow. The paper’s quite academic so you’ll most likely need to give it multiple reads. However, there are some gems from that document that are well worth quoting here.

… the cultural leader is an agent of change who contributes to cultural development in their country, Discussion Paper 21 Ayeta Anne Wangusa region or continent. The cultural leader does this through visioning and building relations with partners to address systemic challenges resulting from our colonial history and the current globalisation era. It is also about conserving our intangible heritage for posterity, as well analysing the underlying belief systems of Africa and their interaction with the Global North and Global South, to promote social cohesion and sustainable development. —Ayeta Anne Wangusa, Executive Director of Culture and Development East Africa (CDEA)

What is urgently needed today is leadership which promotes dialogue for new governance, collaboration and coproduction endeavors with civil society and cultural movements. —Lucina Jimenez, Director General of ConArte Internacional

Voices Not Expected

One of the areas we tend to dismiss when discussing arts and culture is the Middle East. We do so out of great ignorance. The regions where war is most commonplace are also homes to great troves of artistic and cultural importance that have influenced artists, writers, playwrights, and politicians for centuries. Many of these artifacts have been recently destroyed and preserving them seems almost impossible. I found these statements from the discussion paper most interesting.

I n Arab cultural scenes with no or overpowering art infrastructures, small and short circuit networks formulate; friendships sustain some of the bonding. Within these networks, collaborations force themselves on individuals; time is limited, shifting dramatically, and so are the identified resources, therefore sharing or teaming up allows being in and outside of a production process. There is no continuity for those who fall out of these processes. Personal, or collaborative, collections of notes, writings, ephemera, accesses, experiences and interests in miniscule histories are the sites of intervention. There is still a huge discrepancy in sustaining rights; to access, to copy, to say, to stay, to object, to reject, to exit.

…

A cultural leader is not a state, but its policy; is not an institution but its dynamic; is not a community, but its bond; is not a social (media) space, not a financial model, nor a future built by forecasts, but their logic of probabilities, that could continue to enhance our working models. —Ala Younis is an artist, trained as an architect in Amman.

Wait, There’s More

The discussion paper is quite full of perspective that should yank us from thinking exclusively about local perspectives and open our conversations more to immigrants bringing their culture and artistic perspective to us. Consider these examples:

In Asian cultures there is a long tradition of artistic creativity as communal, rather than the individual specialist called artist, and in many Asian societies there is no word for artist.

…

Lopsided emphasis on left brain thinking stunts creative imagination. It is unfortunate that many Asian countries inherited educational systems from the industrial revolution of eighteenth century.

…

Cultural leadership, especially in education and official policy, should be able to promote not only the intelligence quotient, but intuitive, creative intelligence and all other intelligences that enrich the creative imagination. —Felipe M. De Leon, Jr., Chairman and Commissioner for the Arts of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts, in the Philippines

Cultural leadership is not only the implementation of concepts and theories from the business world into the cultural sector, but – like the concepts of cultural management and cultural entrepreneurship – it has also to do with the creation of social value by artists and organisations and how to balance managerial effectiveness with artistic value for society.

…

Regardless of how and where these challenges emerge, indisputably leaders will be required for the cultural sector. The cultural sector now has little choice but to respond: the present challenges of new media, changing audiences, dwindling public funds, and a decline of historical awareness are merely the next steps in this continuing pathway. —Annick Schramme, President of ENCATC, the European Network on Cultural Management and Cultural Policy

What I’m Missing

While justing being in Malta this time of year would be nice, what I’m missing are the voices of incredibly talented and intelligent people as they discuss ways to make sure the arts and culture continue to develop throughout the century in the face of numerous obstacles. Participants posting from Twitter give us just a taste of those conversations.

You have to be an activist to become a political artist. – Chandraguptha Thenuwara on #fake political art #artsummitmalta

— Perduta Gente (@PerdutaGente) October 19, 2016

Kelli McClusky: Self-censorship happens all the time. Especially when funding is cut without reason or sedition laws enacted #artsummitmalta

— Esther Anatolitis (@_esther) October 19, 2016

Do artistic interests drive this agenda, or are arts & culture being instrumentalised to achieve other goals? #ASEFculture #artsummitmalta

— ASEF Culture360 (@culture360_asef) October 19, 2016

Yvonne Donders: I believe in the universality of human rights but not the uniformity of human rights. Dignity with diversity #artsummitmalta

— Esther Anatolitis (@_esther) October 19, 2016

“She was so poor she didn’t have anything more than money” @SergioMautone #artsummitmalta

— Lucy Hannah (@LucyHannah19) October 19, 2016

I could, of course, go on and on and on. You wouldn’t read them if I did, though. If you’re interested in more, search #artsummitmalta for current tweets coming from the summit.

We have thousands of arts organizations scattered across the US, most of which do absolutely incredible work. We need these larger conversations, though. Art and cutlture is not merely a local experience, but a global one. The questions and challenges are universal. We need to grab hold of these conversations and push them forward.

And maybe next year I can hid aboard a tramp steamer or something and actually participate.

Photography / PotD / science

Being Alive, Right Now, Is Challenging

October 19, 2016

When you arise in the morning, think of what a precious privilege it is to be alive – to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love. —Marcus Aurelius

charles i. letbetter - being alive, right now, is the best

We already have more advantages, more options, than any other generation to inhabit this planet. Maybe we should take advantage of that

I hesitate to write anything sounding too terribly positive. While I want to be encouraging and supportive, every time I do it seems to backfire on me and I have the worst day possible. There are times one might get the impression that the universe is saying, “How DARE you be positive and hopeful? You must be punished for your remarks.” I know I’m not alone. Many days we wake up and absolutely nothing we do goes as planned. Flat tires. Disappointing people. Failed expectations. A stain on your new shirt—before noon. I’m not really expecting today to be any different.

I finally got around to reading President Obama’s article in Wired this morning, though. He presents a rather challenging premise:

We are far better equipped to take on the challenges we face than ever before. I know that might sound at odds with what we see and hear these days in the cacophony of cable news and social media. But the next time you’re bombarded with over-the-top claims about how our country is doomed or the world is coming apart at the seams, brush off the cynics and fearmongers. Because the truth is, if you had to choose any time in the course of human history to be alive, you’d choose this one. Right here in America, right now.

Do I want to believe the President? Sure. Intellectually, the points he makes are valid. What we actually experience is often different, though.

A Matter Of Perspective

When discussing how things have improved over the years, the President makes some compelling points:

Life expectancy is up.
The share of Americans with a college education is up too.
Tens of millions of Americans recently gained the security of health insurance.
Blacks and Latinos have risen up the ranks to lead our businesses and communities.
Women are a larger part of our workforce and are earning more money.
Once-quiet factories are alive again
More countries know democracy.
More kids are going to school.
A smaller share of humans know chronic hunger or live in extreme poverty.
In nearly two dozen countries—including our own—people now have the freedom to marry whomever they love.

I can’t and wouldn’t want to argue any of those points. Some tremendous strides have taken place over the past several years and, combined, they have made life on this planet better than many of our parents and grandparents could have ever dreamed. Tremendous advantages and opportunities make this a great time to be alive.

At the same time, however, being alive right now, in 2016, holds some pretty significant challenges.

Unjust and disproportionate incarceration of people of color
Police violence against unarmed citizens has reached a breaking point
Corporate takeover of the political system has turned us into an oligarchy
The gap between the richest one percent and everyone else is wider than ever
Family revenue has either stayed flat or declined while inflation has soared
A record number of adults have been unemployed for over six months with increasingly fewer prospects.
Native peoples are still the most disenfranchised group and their property rights are not respected.

We’ve made progress, but we’re a long way from being where we should, where we want, and where we need to be.

Looking To The Future

Taking an honest assessment of where we are right now, what it means to be alive in 2016, is both sobering and hopeful. We’ve gotten some things right, but there is still much to do. President Obama refers frequently to the late Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek science fiction franchise as an example of an ideal society:

What I loved about it was its optimism, the fundamental belief at its core that the people on this planet, for all our varied backgrounds and outward differences, could come together to build a better tomorrow.

While such optimism is laudable, it is difficult to anticipate we are anywhere near that ideal when one of the top headlines this morning reads: Russia may be getting ready ‘to level Aleppo to the ground’ While those of us in the United States might be in a cooperative mood, the same can hardly be said of the rest of the world. Uhm, Brexit, anyone? The current mood seems to be that everyone wants to do their own thing. Cooperation will just have to wait.

Looking to the future, though, we have to have some degree of optimism, don’t we? If we can’t find any points of hope, any signs of encouragement, any indication that things might improve, then what is it going to mean to be alive in 2020 and beyond?

I’m sitting here this morning wondering what the future of photography is going to look like. Will any of us manage to stay in business through another ten years of rapid change? We not only face technological advancements that are impossible to predict, but we are also experiencing a complete upheaval in how people view photography altogether. Is it possible for our profession to survive?

What Science May Yield

The President is sold on the concepts of Science in solving the greatest challenges facing the world. His take is that one of the reasons now is a great time to be alive is because science is poised to develop new solutions to problems that have plagued us for centuries. He writes in the article:

Just as in the past, to clear these hurdles we’re going to need everyone—policy makers and community leaders, teachers and workers and grassroots activists, presidents and soon-to-be-former presidents. And to accelerate that change, we need science. We need researchers and academics and engineers; programmers, surgeons, and botanists. And most important, we need not only the folks at MIT or Stanford or the NIH but also the mom in West Virginia tinkering with a 3-D printer, the girl on the South Side of Chicago learning to code, the dreamer in San Antonio seeking investors for his new app, the dad in North Dakota learning new skills so he can help lead the green revolution.

So, the answer to our challenges is that we need to re-conceptualize? I love the President’s optimism, but when I’m sitting here worried about keeping the lights on and having enough food for my family, it’s rather difficult for me to re-conceptualize anything much beyond how to find yet another way to make ground beef interesting. I’m not even sure what it would mean to reconceptualize photography. I try wrapping my head around that question and end up having to take a couple of pills and lie down for a moment.

Alive And Functioning

I am thankful for all the advantages that come with being alive right now. I’m thankful that we have this thing called the Internet that allows me to share with you both my words and my pictures. I’m thankful that life has improved for whole groups of people and that there are almost endless opportunities for my children.

Still, there is more to live than just being alive. For life to be fulfilling we must also be functioning toward some end.

My AARP card came in the mail yesterday. I am of an age where many of my peers are enjoying grandchildren and looking forward to the joys of retirement. Not all of us are there, though. Many of us look at the potential demise of our careers and wonder how we are going to continue to function in this science-oriented future. We can try to keep up, but doing so is a struggle. We don’t especially have a lot of money to spend on new equipment, or classes to teach us what Millennials inherently know.

Did you catch that line in the President’s statement about “soon-to-be-former presidents?” President Obama is breaking with tradition and remaining in Washington, D.C. after the new president takes office. Rather than running away and retreating in quiet and solitude, as Presidents before him have done, Mr. Obama plans to stay active and stay involved in helping shape the future development of the world.

Maybe we can do the same. Stay active. Stay involved. Don’t let ourselves be pushed aside, relegated to some memory of how things used to be. We are alive now. Therefore, we need to be an integral part of what is happening now.

Will we?

Art / PotD

Color In Life As In Pictures

October 18, 2016

Oh, half of what’s out there is worthless. The only pictures I like are the ones I’ve taken. —William Eggleston

charles i. letbetter - color in life and pictures

What color brings to pictures is the same thing it brings to life: excitement, variance, and a different way of seeing things

I had difficulty choosing pictures to go with this article. I just finished reading the New York Times interview with William Eggleston that was published yesterday. Times writer Augusten Burroughs calls Eggleston, “The pioneer of color photography.” I’ve also heard of him referred to as the godfather of color photography. Whichever title one chooses to use, the man has done a lot to further color photography. So, choosing images that really match that topic involved a mental argument as to exactly what color photography represents.

Being brutally honest, I’ve not always been the world’s biggest Eggleston fan. I’ve seen the images from his 1976 exhibit at the New York Museum of Modern Art, which the article casually glosses over with little more than a side mention. I understand why critics at the time weren’t impressed. Eggleston’s work has, at times, been the sort that one looks at after a few years and thinks, “Oh, now I get it.” Just casually browsing through his images without taking the time to understand them can, depending on one’s level of photographic comprehension, leave one disappointed and unimpressed.

What Eggleston’s work did, though, was bring color photography legitimacy in a world that was stuck looking at things in black and white. As color film and processing changed over the years, color pictures changed our perspective of life. We were forced to look at things differently, something that a lot of people don’t find comfortable.

The Color Of Emotion

Photographers who have never shot film, and there are millions who haven’t, don’t understand the challenge of having to choose whether to shoot in color or black and white. Digital cameras inherently take color pictures. Even if one has a camera with a black and white setting [which is never a good idea, in my opinion], the sensor still “sees” in color and then makes the conversion. When using film, though, one has to make a decision before the pictures are taken, often before one even stops onto the set. Sitting in art meetings over the years, whether to use color or black and white film was almost always one of the first arguments the team would face. Opinions both directions tend to be strong.

Critical to this discussion is understanding that color changes the emotion of pictures. If I were to set two pictures side-by-side, one color, one black-and-white, your opinion hinges not on different qualities of processing, but on how the different images make you feel. Consider the image at the top of this page. Here it is processed in black and white:

Emulated Fomapan film with LAB processing

The question is not whether one version is better than the other; both have their distinctive qualities. What matters is which version best communicates the emotion I was attempting to capture with the image. In this case, I prefer color if for no other reason than the striking contrast of red blood in the water.That aspect is so muted in the black and white version that one might miss it entirely if just casually glancing at the photo.

One can argue that either version of the picture is better than the other and be technically correct. Are we shooting merely for technicalities, though, or are we taking pictures that allow people to feel something? When we choose color, we make a choice in how we want to direct viewers’ emotions.

Color In A Black And White World

Because photography started out monochrome, there have been, and always will be, those who are strongly adamant that black and white is the only legitimate format for professional photographs. The Times article makes that point when the author asks Eggleston what he thinks of Ansel Adams. Eggleston replied:

We didn’t know each other, but if we did, I’d tell him the same thing: “I hate your work.”

The sentiment runs both directions, though. The article recounts a conversation between Eggleston and renowned photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson in which the latter tells the former, “You know, William, color is bull shit.”

Not everyone wants to see the world in color. Not everyone wants to feel the emotions and challenges that color brings to pictures. Black and white gets straight to the point, emphasizes the facts, and allows some things to become lost in the shadows. We all know people who are the same way. The rules are the rules and either one follows them or they don’t. People who view the world in black and white tend to be very precise in their judgments, they appreciate the clarity of strong, well-defined lines and the clean contrast that black and white affords.

Color brings more freedom to the world, and to imagery. Color opens up possibilities that maybe the rules are bendable, or not necessary at all. Color lets us see what’s lurking in the shadows, enjoy the subtle gradients of light, and feel the warmth, or the coldness, of an image. You almost certainly know people who are colorful, who take chances without regard to the consequences, who explore beyond traditional boundaries, and are very open about how they feel. Their emotions are obvious and their communication often louder than we might appreciate.

Analysis Paralysis

If I have a favorite quote from the article, and Eggleston provided plenty of good ones to save for the archives, it would be this one regarding critical discussion of his work:

The only thing one can do is really look at the damn things. It’s just not making much sense to talk about them.

We are guilty, far too often, of analyzing both photographs and life to the point that they begin to lose any meaning. We too often need to justify our reasons for either liking or not liking a photograph, or a situation, or even a person. Some of us are color people. Some of us are black and white. And there are many who cross back and forth, constantly wrestling with the emotional and visual exchanges between the two.

I’ve no problem admitting that I am of the latter camp. I find pleasure in both forms of photography and both forms of people. While mixing the two doesn’t always work, I would hate to live in a world where either one fails to exist. What Eggleston’s work teaches us, if anything, is that we need both. One might be more appropriate for a given situation, but fundamentally neither is better than the other. They are, simply, different, and that difference is wonderful.

Life is the same way, is it not? The sooner we accept that both color and monochrome has value, perhaps then we can get on about the business of loving and caring for each other rather than this stupid arguing we’ve been doing. We’ve not been making much sense with our petty picking and fussing. Enjoy the pictures of life. We’ll all be better for it.

pop culture / PotD

Signs We’re Doing Everything Wrong

October 17, 2016

charles i. letbetter - signs we are doing everything wrong

Any form of over-indulgence creates within the body warning signs of destruction. —Mother Angelica

charles i. letbetter - signs we're doing everything wrong

Judging from the warning signs on headlines this morning we must be doing everything wrong.

Erg. Another Monday. Looking through social media this morning I can sense the fear and trepidation. Signs are everywhere. No one is looking forward to today. Some people could lose their jobs. Other people might lose more. While there’s no way to tell exactly what the day might hold, all the signs point toward this being a less than stellar day.

I like to think that what comes across my social media feeds is a pretty broad and reasonably accurate feeling for what is resonating across America. Obviously, I’m getting a lot of political material, but there are a lot of other things, from memes to articles to status updates, that give me a reasonable snapshot for the general mood of certain demographic sets. The signs this morning seem obvious: We’re doing everything wrong, or at least, we’re willing to believe we are.

Personally, I rather doubt that reality is quite as bleak as it is being presented. When shown a picture of a bright, sunshine-filled day, there are a lot of us that immediately start looking for what is in the shadows. We go looking for trouble even where there is none. We expect things to go poorly for us. In doing so, we miss the beauty of the whole picture.

However, we do have a tendency to really mess up a lot. Fortunately, a lot of people have written a lot of articles to help us correct our mistakes. Consider some of the gems I found this morning.

This Is How You Should Be Taking Care Of Your Lingerie

Spoiler alert: You’re washing your bras too damn often. The whole purpose of the article, published by Harpers Bazaar, Australe, is to convince their readers that they need to be a little more delicate with their delicates. Apparently, while women are really good about taking care of silk blouses and dresses, they don’t show the same concern for lingerie made from the same material. Instead, everything just gets dumped into the laundry, washed with harsh chemicals, and then one wonders why they wear out so frequently.

I really have to wonder about the whole bra washing thing, though. I’ve seen enough bras and caught hint of the fragrance that comes from them when one has been perspiring a bit. The smell is far from attractive. Sports bras, especially, which some people seem to think are fine to continue wearing after they’ve had their workout, have the ability to stink just as much as men’s athletic gear. Do you really want to let those things sit around a ripen before their washed?

I get it, the elastic materials do break down and wear out in the wash. However, doesn’t it totally defeat the purpose of looking nice if one doesn’t smell pleasant when someone gets close?

Women With Big Butts Are Smarter And Healthier

Wishful thinking. Check the source when you see articles like this. They tend to come from websites such as globetoday.com and terrificphotostoday.me. Notice that I’m not giving you links to either of those sites. Don’t go there. I know a lot of women would really like to believe that the mass of their buttocks has a correlation to the amount of brain power one has, but let’s get real: you know damn good and well that’s not true.

Don’t take my word for it, Snopes already disproved this one for you. Same goes for the one about drinking wine at night to lose weight. And the one about children inheriting their smarts from their mother. Sorry, it’s all just wishful thinking. We keep looking for shortcuts and they keep just not happening. One would think that by the time we reach adulthood, at least by the time we’re 30 or so, that we would have figured out that there is no easy way to lose weight or get smarter. Both require work. Yet, time after time we continue to fall for articles like this that offer some hope that maybe, just maybe, we can get away with our desire to emulate sloths.

If there’s one thing we learn from Monday after Monday it is the fact that we have to work for everything we get, and even when we work for it we don’t always get it. There are no shortcuts. Sorry.

Four Signs Your Relationship Is Headed To Its Doom

Because, yeah, that’s just the news you want first thing on a Monday morning. Are we really that desperate for bad news about our relationships or are we just looking for ways to self-sabotage? If you’re in a relationship and things seem to be going well, then why would you want to go looking for trouble? If your relationship is already not going well, do you really need more signs of the tragedy that awaits?

Articles like this exist for the sake of people who are fundamentally flawed and cannot accept the possibility that someone might actually care for them without having some ulterior motive. I’m not even sure that self-esteem counseling helps these people. They go through relationship after relationship, throwing away perfectly good people who would actually like to fall in love with them, but are jettisoned before they have the chance.

Here’s the real scoop:the number one sign that your relationship is headed to its doom is that you’re looking for signs your relationship is headed to its doom. Check your relationship paranoia and let someone love you.

10 Sex Positions That Will Get Her Off Every Time

I hate articles like this because they start from the premise that none of us really know what we’re doing in bed. Granted, every year yields a new crop of rookies and there are genuinely some people, specifically the most devout from any given sex-shaming religious group, who don’t have a fucking clue, literally. If the world really took relationships seriously, we’d be learning these things in school right about the time we’re losing our collective virginity. Heaven forbid we actually teach practical relationship skills anywhere, however. So, articles like this one continue to be popular.

Here’s the rub: everyone’s different. Want to know what will get your partner off every time? Talk to them. Find out what they like and what works for their body. You can’t trust what you read in an article because what feels great to one person might be downright painful for someone else. Blindly following the instructions of some how-to article you’ve read online can get you dumped out of bed before you even have time to unwrap that condom I’m sure you were planning on using.

Communication is a critical aspect of every relationship and the bedroom is no exception. Experimenting and trying different things is a lot of fun, but talk to your partner before actually attempting something new. The results will be better for both of you.

You Are Not As Helpless As You Think

The very reason all these articles and memes exist is because we doubt ourselves and our abilities. We don’t think we’re as smart as we are. We don’t think we’re as attractive as we are. What we read online and what we see in various media has us convinced that we are horribly flawed and need all the help we can possibly get. Look down your newsfeed this morning and one can easily come away with the impression that we’re all doing everything wrong.

Guess what: we’re not. Most of us are just fine, thank you very much. Those of us who do struggle are not nearly in as bad a shape as we tend to believe. So, stop doubting yourself. Think positive. Believe in what you can do.

And then duck because this is still Monday and the universe is out to get you.

Current Issues / PotD / Social Commentary

Love As A Political Platform

October 16, 2016

I think artists are always investigating how to have an economic, political platform. —Jeff Koons

What if we ditched the existing political parties and went with one that has love as its political platform? Consider the potential

Another Sunday morning. I’ve already taken the dog for his morning walk, both of us enjoying the extra light from the full Hunter’s Moon. The second pot of coffee is on. Dishes are washing in the dishwasher. Clothes are drying in the dryer. For the moment, everyone is asleep except me and the black cat, Burberry. She’s taking advantage of the quiet to give herself a thorough cleaning. For however many seconds this lasts, it is calming.

We are so incredibly inundated with politics this season that there seems to be no escape. I don’t mind admitting I’m concerned. I doubt the accuracy of polls in a race where a large number of voters are likely to go with a literal coin toss on election day. With Russia threatening, Yemen simmering, and Syria ready to explode (again), moments like these where my blood pressure is almost back within normal range are few.

At moments like this, I can’t help wondering what might be Poppa’s sermon topic were he preaching this morning. He disliked politics and didn’t think they belonged anywhere near the pulpit. Yet, in an atmosphere as politically charged as this one, even the church isn’t immune.

Perhaps he would artfully dodge the matter by talking about love as a political platform. He would use John 13:34 as his text: A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. He liked that passage. From there, he would develop the political platform based on the qualities of love. Perhaps something like this:

Love As Domestic Policy

When developing any political platform, one has to first consider how they are going to handle matters here at home. Certainly, we can use a lot of love right here, right now, and there are myriad ways love could be applied. One strong move might be to dissolve the two existing major political parties. They have become so incredibly polarized that they are no longer able to function. The hate between the two sides of the aisles in Congress has brought much-needed legislation to a standstill. Dissolving both parties and starting over with a stated intent of working from a basis of respect, loving those of contrary opinion, willing to sacrifice for the sake of consensus, would set a strong example for the people of the United States to follow.

Across the country, applying love through everything the federal government does would have a profound effect. We would end mass incarceration, mandatory sentencing, and find ways to actually help those who are challenged to fit into society. We would take an attitude of moving from community policing to community helping, perhaps putting more social workers on the street who can help people address problems before any law is broken. We would abolish the failed war on drugs, look at the legitimate power of cannabis, and address the basic conditions that lead to severe drug use.

A political platform that uses love for domestic policy invokes radical changes in the way we think, in the way relate to each other. We are not adversaries as many would have us believe. We are brothers and sisters committed to each other in Love, and that is a power that can take communities from the slums to the heights of prosperity, from crime to celebration, and from desperation to hope.

Love As Economic Policy

The economy is a huge and very sensitive issue in any political platform. When President Obama first entered office in 2009, we were in the throws of the worst economy since the Great Depression. Yet, while the numbers say that the economy has improved dramatically, those improvements haven’t been felt on the street where people are still struggling. That we need to apply some love to our economic policies seem obvious, but exactly how would we do that?

Perhaps we need to start by de-incentivizing greed. Love does not hoard, love gives. We have, since the beginning of the stock markets, based our measurements of economic growth based on monetary accumulation. We look at sales growth as a primary indicator of a company’s value with no consideration of whether they bring any actual benefit to the national or global population. If we change our valuation away from one that rewards greed to one that rewards actual benefit, we incentivize growth that is actually felt outside the corporate boardroom.

Love also is found in an economy where no one has too much and no one has too little. Our national wage system is in tatters and reinforces a social caste system that keeps the poor and disadvantaged, especially people of color, from making any personal economic progress. Yes, love rewards those who achieve, but it does not turn its back on those who struggle. Love sets a wage standard that allows everyone to live without need, without fear of being in want, and with an ability to be proud of who they are and what they do.

Love As Foreign Policy

Insomuch as the United States is a global power, we have a lot of influence in what happens around the world. We have the ability to change everything from the spread of deadly disease to the ability to grow crops and make a region self-sustaining. We have, too often, used our influence and power for bad. The world desperately needs for us to turn our foreign policy around and use it to spread love across the globe.

We do that by funding programs and providing assistance to efforts that help people, not those that hurt them. We spread love by helping to stabilize economies so that there is an absence of need. Love comes not when we sell our surplus weapons so that one tribe can have power over another, but when we trade their weapons for food, medicine, and economic support.

To those who insist on war and doing harm to others, we respond first to those they victimize, welcoming refugees, especially those persecuted and in need of medical attention. We keep our offers of love on the table at all times, but we fund no one’s aggression and do not allow our acts of kindness to be manipulated and misused. We defend where we must, but we do not utilize aggression as a means of getting what we want.

Love As Education Policy

Love facilitates learning throughout one’s lifetime. Love looks for ways to remove the barriers to learning whether they be financial, logistical, emotional, or intellectual. Love finds ways to help those for whom learning is a challenge and is not satisfied with any excuse for one not being taught to the full level of their potential. Love rewards those who learn and encourages them to use what they know, along with the skills and talents they possess to make the world a better place.

Love also understands that as much as we are all lifetime learners, we are also teachers. Some may teach in a classroom, others may teach through skill development or helping to advance understanding in critical thinking. Love values teaching because it understands the necessity of teaching to improve the learning that moves the world forward. As a political platform, teaching is critical because we have, for too long, relied on inappropriate standards of measure that punish actual broad instruction. Love gives teachers room to utilize different styles, methods, and pedagogies to meet the instructional needs of their students.

More than anything, Love shares knowledge and wisdom with respect, teaching history with regard to its impact on different cultures, teaching science as the progressive understanding of the earth based on fact rather than mythologies, teaching mathematics in light of its practical applications, and teaching the arts as an open expression of culture and personhood.

Love As Healthcare Policy

There is no political platform that can promise to make everyone well, to increase everyone’s longevity, or prevent new disease. Living and loving involves risks and where there are risks there is inevitably pain and infirmities that love on its own cannot prevent nor take away. How love responds to these critical moments of need starts by, once again, removing the greed incentive that has placed adequate healthcare out of the reach of many. Healthcare as a profit center is not love. Medicine as a source of profit is not love. Instead of rewarding the healthcare system based on the amount of profit it can produce, love dictates that reward instead be based on the amount of good being done.

Love does not deny anyone the best available healthcare, neither does it distribute care based on status or economic or social standing. Love provides to each the treatment they need at the time they need it without any unnecessary delay. Access to medicines is universal and availability of appliances such as artificial limbs are unhindered.

As policy, love takes medical care wherever it is needed, looking for creative and different ways to reach remote rural areas where care has too often been sparse and insufficient. Love leaves no one hurting and seeks to improve the quality of life for all.

Love And The Interior

Responsibilities for the Department of Interior are overly broad and too frequently under-funded. Everything from infrastructure to energy to the environment falls under this enormous umbrella and its myriad subdivisions. Yet, here too, a political platform based on love offers a more balanced and practical way of addressing the many physical needs that occur throughout our country. Love reaches out, looks forward, and protects our resources.

Love develops infrastructure based less on what currently exists and more on what is necessary for the future, looking at new technologies and embracing means of transportation that improve efficiency while reducing environmental impact. Love longs for sustainability in an energy policy that relies less on resources that can not be replaced and emphasizes those that are naturally occurring and provide benefit to the environment.

Love understands that we are firmly connected to this planet and must be good stewards of its use. Protections for waterways and all that exists within them is critical to a loving environment. Reducing our own footprint is a demonstration of love that allows those who come behind us to continue enjoying the natural wonders that fill our lives with beauty and pleasure.

Love As Social Policy

Our society is ill from all the partisan bickering to which we’ve been subjected. This is not a new disease for our country, but one which has reached such a critical point that have lost the use of some through alienation and marginalized many through hate. We need a political platform that brings love back as the dominant force in our society, encouraging and rewarding those who do for others before doing for themselves.

We need a national social policy that is wholly inclusive, so that people of color needn’t cower in fear, so that no one should ever be afraid to express who they are or what their sexuality might be, so that everyone gets an equal voice, even those with little to offer in return. A political platform based on love does not disregard the elderly no matter their age or level of ability. Neither does it leave children abandoned, starving, and without sufficient care.

Love rewards those who give, whether in terms of finances, or skills, or time spent holding the hand of one whose days are nearing their end. Love rewards those who strive for peace, diligently working to end conflicts before they escalate to violence. If the United States is to be the shining beacon of hope we want it to be, we must utilize love more than anything to stamp out all the fears that keep us from trusting, from engaging, and from appreciating those around us.

Starting A Conversation

We are, quite obviously, too late to impact this election cycle with a political platform so radical as that dominated by love. We can, however, begin a conversation that moves us forward toward a future where our political discourse is less dominated by hate. There will always be those who disagree. Vice is as much a part of the human condition as is virtue. Yet, the one we feed, the one we emphasize, the one we practice in our own dealings is the one that will dominate the next election.

All religions, not just Christianity, hold the same mandate given in scripture that we are to love one another. Love is not an option. Even if one holds no belief in a higher power, the universe demands unity, cooperation, respectfulness, and peace. We have seen the depths to which the ravages of hate can take us. Now, let us reverse course and set our sights for the heights possible through love.

Yes, I realize that this all sounds so very Pollyanish. Ideals set goals that are seldom achievable in reality. Still, we get out of our government exactly what we put in . We have endorsed hate for too long. Perhaps it’s time we try the alternative.

Peace be unto you.

PotD / science

Science Says: Eat Chocolate Cake For Breakfast

October 14, 2016

charles i. letbetter - science say: chocolate cake for breakfast is okay

Let’s face it, a nice creamy chocolate cake does a lot for a lot of people; it does for me. —Audrey Hepburn

charles i. letbetter - science says: eat chocolate cake for breakfast

Recent studies show that the time of day one eats chocolate matters. So, chocolate cake for breakfast it is!

Whey my boys were small, we had a tradition of saving some of their birthday cake and having it for breakfast the next morning. The same rule applied to their mom and I, so five times a year we were having cake for breakfast and, yes, most of the time it was chocolate. Our reasoning was that the ingredients in chocolate cake (especially if it was homemade) wasn’t all that different from a bowl of cereal. Plenty of protein, grains, dairy, and actually less sugar than is in many kids’ cereals made having chocolate cake for breakfast a lot of fun.

What I never expected back then was for there to be any science supporting what we were doing. Now, there is. Multiple studies, in fact, having been looking at the effectiveness not only of what we eat but when we eat it. As it turns out, much of our weight issues have to do not merely with the content and quantity of our food, but when we are consuming it. If we alter when we eat certain foods, such as chocolate, they can actually help us to lose weight rather than contribute to gaining.

Wait, are we saying that eating chocolate cake for breakfast might help someone lose weight? Well, that could be stretching things just a tiny bit, but ultimately, yes, one piece of chocolate cake in the morning could help curb one’s appetite for sweets the rest of the day, leading to possible weight loss.

The Science Behind It All

Chocolate cake for breakfast. This is one of those pseudo-science things that is easily debunked by real science, right? Next thing I know they’ll be telling us that staring at the sun cures cancer. We can’t really believe this, can we?

Yes, you can believe. The 32-week study was done at Tel Aviv University. They took 193 non-diabetic clinically obese people and divided them into two groups. The first group was given a 300 calorie breakfast and that was it. Good luck, folks. The second group, however, was given a 600-calorie breakfast that included chocolate pudding. Okay, not quite the same as chocolate cake, but damn close. I’m guessing the pudding was a little easier to prepare.

The results? The group that had pudding for breakfast lost, on average, thirty-seven pounds more than those in the group that only had 300 calories. Amazing, isn’t it? Now, why do you suppose that happened?

Basic biology here, boys and girls. Our metabolism runs higher earlier in the day, when we first get up. Therefore, our bodies are better able to process all those complex proteins and carbohydrates. Bonus points: by getting our sugar fix in earlier, we’re less likely to crave additional snacks and sweets during the day. This means going ahead and having a couple of donuts with that cup of coffee in the morning isn’t doing you as much damage as you might have thought.

All Things In Moderation

This is not giving you permission to eat an entire chocolate cake in one setting. The type of chocolate being used makes a difference as well. Dark chocolate, with more than 80% cacao, not only helps squelch the cravings, but is shown to improve cognitive function and enhance reasoning, memory, and focus. Milk chocolate? Not so much. A lot more fat and sugars there. One has to be careful and apply a bit of those smarts that you picked up at school between naps.

Still, what these studies demonstrate is that we don’t necessarily have to starve ourselves in order to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. We don’t need to do all those crazy diets, take a bunch of questionable pills, or any of the other nonsense we submit ourselves to in the name of dieting. This goes right back to exactly the same thing you learned in second-grade health class: balance. What we’re learning now, though, is that in addition to that food pyramid, there’s also a time scale. Chocolate is best in the morning. Bananas, it turns out, are perfect for lunch, when they can really help you get through the rest of your day. Eat one after dinner, though, and it’s more likely to upset your stomach and cause digestive problems.

This whole time-of-day science is really just getting started. I’ve searched for similar studies and, so far, have only found the small-sample early studies used to justify larger studies. Eventually, though, we could end up with a much clearer picture of when we should be eating different foods.

For now, we’re very happy that we have scientific evidence that chocolate cake for breakfast is a good thing. With this news, and the fact that it’s really, really cold here in Indiana this morning, I might just have to bake a fresh cake tonight for breakfast tomorrow. Something tells me the family won’t object.

Fashion / pop culture

Happy No Bra Day!

October 13, 2016

People think I’m trying to make a fashion statement because I never wear a bra. It’s really that I’m a tomboy at heart. —Cameron Diaz

Happy No Bra Day! We hope women everywhere are enjoying this special day of freedom

The notification that today is No Bra Day came through my newsfeed early this morning, long before anyone else was awake. I couldn’t help laughing. Kat never wears a bra. She doesn’t need to and even when someone thinks she should she won’t. So, this is a non-event around here. Every day is No Bra Day.

Yet, for millions of women who have been convinced that they’re just not fully dressed, or that they are somehow immodest if they’re not wearing a bra, the concept can actually be rather frightening. Women with especially large breasts are more likely to be ridiculed and verbally assaulted in public if they are not wearing a bra. People can be very mean if they think one’s boobs are not sufficiently supported and women are much more likely than men to make mention of the situation, frequently in terms that are derisive and insulting. Worst of all, there are far too many men, one of whom is running for President, who think that the absence of a bra is an invitation to touch or make other inappropriate and unwanted advances on a woman.

Not wearing a bra creates far more issues than it should. After all, the damn thing wasn’t even invented (in the form we know it) until 1914. There were a few precursors, and the argument can be made that women throughout history have been binding their breasts for different reasons. Still, we make far too big a deal about whether women are wearing a bra than the garment deserves.

Reasons For Not Wearing A Bra

I find it rather interesting just how many studies have been done on the effects of wearing, or not wearing, a bra. What wasn’t surprising was that most the studies were conducted by women. Looking through the material, one quickly gets the impression that a lot of women do not like bras in any way, shape, or form. Why, then, are lingerie stores, such as Victoria’s Secret, so popular? Because many women feel that they have to wear bras and that those bras have to be sexy if they want to impress a potential mate. Never mind that the “sexy” bras are practically worthless when it comes to providing support. Women have been brain-washed into thinking that wearing a bra is something they have to do.

The reality is that women’s bodies do better and are healthier when they don’t wear a bra. Repetitive studies have proven this for a number of years. Young women, especially, are healthier and less likely to have breast cancer if they never wear a bra. Women’s bodies form more collagen and maintain greater elasticity when bras are not worn as teenagers and young adults. And while I’ve always known women who complain about their back hurting if they don’t wear a bra, there is no scientific evidence that wearing a bra helps your back, nor is your back damaged if you leave it off.

Bras are expensive, never fit quite right, don’t allow for the fact that one side is often a different size than the other, and look downright ugly with many fashion styles. The body moves differently, feels different, and looks more natural without a bra. Going without a bra can be very self-affirming and is a strong body-positive statement of self-acceptance. Quite plainly, bras suck.

Don’t Take My Word For It

I’m a guy so I have never known the pressure to wear anything as uncomfortable as women tell me bras are. There is a point here where anything I say might be considered platitudinous (yes, that’s a real word). Fortunately, the good folks over at Refinery 29 have addressed the issue with a really cool video written and produced by women. We’re including it below. I think this pretty much has the final word on the subject. Watch it and, by all means, enjoy going braless today!

Photography / pop culture / PotD

Sorry Conde Nast, Spoiled Brats Are Not Photographers

October 13, 2016

Mighty cultures never — are almost never conquered. They crumble from within. And frankly, I think that a lot of Americans are acting like spoiled brats because everything isn’t working out perfectly every time. —Frank Miller

charles i. letbetter - sorry Vanity Fair, spoiled brats are not photographers

Calling a handful of spoiled brats photographers just because they take a handful of snapshots is insulting to those who really are photographers.

“Bella Hadid, Gigi Hadid, and Kendall Jenner Are All Photographers Now.”

I saw the headline yesterday and immediately seethed with anger. I didn’t need to read any further or see the pictures (though I did after I calmed down). There was no question as to the content or thesis of the W Magazine article. Put a camera in the hands of a spoiled brat, let her take some shots, publish them in a major fashion magazine and call it an editorial. Boom, three new photographers.

Horseshit. We’ve talked about this before. I started to link to the archived articles, but there were too many. This isn’t a new topic and not repeating myself is going to be difficult. The field of photography has become to crowded and too muddied, though, to let an insult like this pass without comment. Yes, I know I’m preaching to the choir—you wouldn’t be reading this if you weren’t supportive of what we do—but the fact that the topic keeps coming up again and again is evidence of how little respect we get from editors, and major publishing houses like Condé Nast, which owns W Magazine, Vanity Fair, and the Vogue franchise. If they think we can be replaced by know-nothing brats with no experience, they truly have no regard for the experience and professionalism of photography at all.

Why Use Spoiled Brats

I understand why the editors wanted to use the particular spoiled brats that they did. The three girls, combined, represent over 100 million potential readers. Thanks to social media, reality television, and a massive PR effort fueled by parents’ money, each of the girls are marketing juggernauts. Any place they go, anything they do is immediately in the spotlight with millions of people—mostly teenage girls with wide-eyed dreams— watching and taking notes. What these girls wear become instant sell-outs. When brands and fashion labels hire them, it’s not because the girls are particularly talented but because of the massive social media following they bring with them. That’s it.

That traditional print magazines are struggling is no secret. Even the massive Condé Nast, which has done better than most in converting its holdings to an online market, just had another C-level shakeup this week, which likely means more cuts coming to the rank-and-file. Money is tight. We get it. Anything they can do to increase the number of eyes coming across their pages they’re willing to try. This is why we see no-talent pseudo-celebrities on the cover of Vogue and Marie Claire.

We have no control over the foibles of celebrity fanaticism. To me, it has never made sense. I don’t go nuts over someone simply because they’ve been on television. I have been on television and let me tell you, it wasn’t all that difficult! Anyone who is breathing can pretty much do the television thing without any additional training or instruction beyond knowing how to talk. Yet, when someone becomes immensely popular, slapping them on a magazine is an easy way to increase sales; it’s easy, brainless content.

Snapshots Don’t Make Photographers

There’s actually a video of Bella Hadid’s “photoshoot.” The video focuses on Bella holding a camera and pushing the shutter button. She doesn’t worry about lighting, someone handles that for her. She isn’t seen processing the photos, someone handles that for her. She doesn’t even make any adjustments to the camera, such as focal length or shutter speed. Someone set those important elements before handing her the camera and told her to not touch them.

There’s no question the spoiled brats in question are good at taking snapshots. The Instagram queens have proven quite well adapted at making sure their face gets in the frame. That doesn’t make any of them photographers, though. Their understanding of cameras comes largely in relation to an app on their top-of-the-line cell phones. Do they understand why one might want to use different size lenses? No. Do they understand how digital cameras actually work? Of course not. Neither do they have any real concept of the delicacy of lighting, white balance, depth of field, focal length, or any of the dozens of other issues that real photographers have to consider before they ever snap the shutter.

Our industry has always been plagued by those who get lucky with a few good snapshots and suddenly think they should be photographers. Typically, however, they are put off by the high cost of entry or discouraged by the steep learning curve. None of those barriers exist, though, when one is rich and has plenty of people more than willing to compensate for their lack of knowledge or experience. So, spoiled brats get called photographers. Stand by, a lot of teenage girls are now interested in photography. Be glad cameras cost thousands of dollars.

The Problem Isn’t Going Away

All the complaining in the world isn’t going to make the problem of spoiled brats trying to be photographers go away. This is the new reality. Magazine editors are much less concerned about the quality of photography and immensely interested in how many eyeballs one’s name might bring to the publication. If you don’t have an Instagram following in the hundreds of thousands, you don’t stand a chance of any editor paying any attention, no matter how wonderful your work might be. We now live in a society where there is a tremendous disconnect between the artistry and talent of being a photographer and the value our perceived to possess. If a photographer is going to succeed, they not only have to take incredible pictures, they have to be champions of social media marketing, something very few of us even begin to understand.

The Hadid and Jenner generation will eventually fade, but they will be replaced by some other group of spoiled brats attempting to claim titles they’ve not earned. It is up to photographers, the real ones, to set a bar high enough that vanity cannot so easily claim a place on the platform. The challenge is ours. We must find an appropriate response.

Current Issues / Personal / PotD

It’s Okay For Boys To Wear Makeup

October 12, 2016

I feel more confident if my makeup looks good. —Ellie Goulding

Major marketing milestones are great, but reaffirming a little boy’s desire to wear makeup is even better.

Kat’s Little Man is bright. He reads well beyond his grade level, excels at math and problem-solving, and is quite sure he already knows everything (and isn’t afraid to say so). That part’s good. Where things become challenging are with his social skills. He likes people, but they annoy the crap out of him. Many of you can relate. They can also hurt his feelings quite easily and one of the most frequent reasons is he likes to wear makeup.

He’s asleep as I write this, but if I were to take a picture at this moment you’d see fingernails with chipped remnants of the nail polish he put on his fingers the other night. He did it himself and did a very good job. That’s about as much as he can get away with at school. The dress code prohibits any child from wearing makeup until fifth grade. If he could, though, he would probably wear makeup to school every day. He likes makeup. A lot. Unfortunately, his expression of that pleasure comes at a price.

So, when Covergirl Cosmetics announced James Charles as their first male spokesmodel, Kat and I thought it was a big deal. I waited until the Tipster had gone to bed before calling Little Man over to the computer. “Hey look!” I said, excited to show him something cool. “Here’s another boy who likes to wear makeup!”

His response was not what I expected.

Biases Start Early

“Yeah, I know. The girls at school still say that nail polish and makeup is only for girls and that boys can’t wear makeup.”

No excitement. He looked at the computer then down at his fingernails. I didn’t need to ask to know how he felt, but I did so that he can learn to express how he’s feeling. “I’m sorry they said that. How did that make you feel?”

“Angry,” he said. “I like wearing makeup and I want to wear makeup but those girls are just stupid.” He was visibly, physically agitated. Not wanting to get him upset right before bedtime, I tried to distract him with this:

It’s official: so excited to welcome @JCharlesBeauty to the COVERGIRL family. ❤️ #COVERGIRLJames! pic.twitter.com/088HlYBjQI

— COVERGIRL (@COVERGIRL) October 11, 2016

That didn’t work. “Yeah, but they still won’t let ME wear makeup to school,” Little Man mused as he returned to his seat on the couch.

“Well, maybe that could be you on that cover one day,” I tried, grasping at straws. I wanted him to be excited and encouraged and that just wasn’t happening.

He looked back at the picture on my monitor and said, “I can do better makeup than that.”

All About The Makeup

At this point, I should probably emphasize that sexuality is not part of the conversation we have with Little Man. He’s not close to understanding that topic yet and we see no reason to push him in any direction. That decision is his to make when he’s ready to make it. At this point, we try hard to not separate our friends into groups. Whether they’re gay, straight, bi, trans, or gloriously somewhere between all those choices, we still refer to them simply as our friends. The sexuality conversations can come later.

What matters for the moment is that Little Man really likes makeup. He always has. Kat has pictures of him when he was only two after he had gotten into her makeup. To some extent, that exploration is quite normal for a little boy at that age. I remember my middle son, the one who is now a Marine, coming out of the bathroom when he was four, his face covered in his mom’s makeup. Many parents have similar stories. Where other boys move on, though, Little Man never has. He loves makeup and is constantly “borrowing” his mom’s best makeup (always the expensive stuff) for his “experiments.”

Since the kids were on fall break last week, Kat took some time with her little guy to teach him how to apply makeup properly. She gave him a palette and the appropriate applicators, then let him put the makeup on her face. While his color choices made it appear in pictures as though his mom had a black eye, his general application and blending were surprisingly good. His eye shadow application was spot on. The kid may well be a natural.

Supporting Little Man’s interest in makeup isn’t difficult. We have plenty of makeup appropriate for experimenting. Kat has the knowledge of how to teach him to use the makeup correctly. No one at home judges his choice in any way (though we might sometimes wince at his color combinations).

We can’t control what happens when he leaves the house, though. He’s not content only wearing makeup at home. Little Man wants to look good when he goes out, even if it’s to the store, and we can’t control the responses he encounters in those situations.

Building A Better World

The atmosphere for boys like Little Man is improving. We have male friends who wear makeup when they visit so he knows he’s not alone. People around him who know him help by not reinforcing old gender stereotypes. There are no “girl” colors or “boy” colors.

Attitudes, though, are a different thing. Seeing that even in second-grade children have already developed opinions about what boys can do or girls can do is disappointing. We not only limit our children’s means of self-expression, but we also limit their ability to explore and try new things. We limit their goals and their desire to achieve when we tell them that they can’t do something simply because of their gender.

As adults, our responsibility is to build a better world for our children. We make sure the air remains breathable. We make sure the planet can continue to provide food. Their safety, education, and ability to achieve are matters we take seriously. We fail all children, though, when we establish limits because of their gender. Boys can wear makeup. Girls can sport crew cuts. Neither should ever feel that anyone is limiting them because of who and what they are.

If we do not provide that world for our children, we all have failed.

awareness

Of course, you would

Share this:

Like this:

Those who want to reap the benefits of this great nation must bear the fatigue of supporting it.— Thomas Paine

Banging My Head Against A Wall

We Get What We Deserve?

Nothing Left To Do

Share this:

Like this:

We are all ready to be savage in some cause. The difference between a good man and a bad one is the choice of the cause. —William James

Is The Threat Real?

How Should We Respond?

Share this:

Like this:

In our work and in our living, we must recognize that difference is a reason for celebration and growth, rather than a reason for destruction. —Audre Lorde

Say Goodbye To The Animals

How Did We Do This?

Habitat Loss and Degradation

Food Systems

Climate Change

Species Overexploitation

Numbering Our Own Days

Share this:

Like this:

The interesting thing is how one guy, through living out his own fantasies, is living out the fantasies of so many other people. —Hugh Hefner

Women Taking The Lead

Halloween Is The Right Time

A Little Preparation

Share this:

Like this:

Forget artificial intelligence – in the brave new world of big data, it’s artificial idiocy we should be looking out for. —Tom Chatfield

Maybe We Need A Little Help

How It Works

How Much Do We Want To Learn?

Share this:

Like this:

To a philosopher all news, as it is called, is gossip, and they who edit and read it are old women over their tea. —Henry David Thoreau

Social News Junkies

Freedom Of Information

Not As Informed As We Think

We’re Tired Of This Shit

Share this:

Like this:

If a man belittles a woman, it could become a lawsuit. If women belittle men, it’s a Hallmark card. —Warren Farrell

Budweiser Sued For False Advertising

The Cases Against Amusement Parks

Some People Don’t Learn

Following The Leader

Share this:

Like this:

Makeup artists are always giving me their stuff. My favorite thing is free stuff. I’ll take anything. —Cindy Margolis

You Need A Camera

You Need A Subject

Lighting Is The Most Important Aspect Of Photography

Posing Is The Most Important Part Of Photography

Editing Is The Most Important Part Of Photography

Post Everything To Facebook

Share this:

Like this:

I’m a champion for personal differences. All society should be much more personalized. —George M. Church

A Highly Personalized Life

Nothing You Do Is Secret

The Potential For Abuse

The Internet Of Things

Share this:

Like this:

Let us put our minds together and see what life we can make for our children. —Sitting Bull

Is This Our Problem?

How Bad Could It Be?

It Couldn’t Happen Here, There Are Laws

Moral Obligations

Share this:

Like this:

Never under any circumstances take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night. —Dave Barry

Culling Through History

Living To Tell The Tale

Our Own Historical Record

Sharing Our Own History

Share this: