The Trouble with the New American Dream

I love business. I enjoyed being part of the actual business part of the music business (most of my frustrations came from how little of that business has to do with work, talent, or brains. It's pure luck and the odds are far worse than Vegas). Making deals is a thrill and I even enjoy it as a spectator sport, particularly watching small businesses take off.

I'm a firm believer in capitalism as a concept, it is the only way that people can be free and open markets create better global relations as well as opportunities where there never were ANY before.

However, what has happened to American business? When did personal greed completely take over to the point where so many people don't even care about their company or colleagues, let alone anyone or anything else?

I have been a big fan of the BBC show Dragon's Den since it started airing here. While not the most realistic portrayal of pitching (especially since entrepreneurs are not allowed to use notes or Power Point), it's a fun way to watch what people are concocting and what makes a pitch click or not. I also like the "dragons" they've had participating over the years, they clearly are in it to make money but they also seem to genuinely want to build the businesses they choose to invest in. Their decisions and offers make logical sense and their advice is often fantastic. I would be happy to work with any of them.

When I first heard that ABC was rolling out Shark Tank I was rather excited to see our homegrown version. I was familiar with the "sharks" on the show already and thought it would be fun to see them in action even in the strange environment of reality television. My main reaction to the actual show, though, is it makes me even more disappointed in the way Americans think about business.

You have to be tough to succeed but do you have to be ruthless? Kevin O'Leary likes to point out constantly that, "Money has no soul," and yet he views money as a religion, to worship and even listen to. Well, I agree, Mr. O'Leary, that money is soulless but that is the reason to NOT worship it. It's also the reason that we, as the ones with souls, could use a lesson in responsible use of money. Money is a tool, much like a gun. Having some or lots of it enables you to do good or evil, the money itself will never make that choice. You can protect your family, build a legacy, and even help people with it. You can also use it to dominate, oppress, and destroy all kinds of entities.

There always have been and always will be people who are motivated purely by greed but that used to be the exception and these days it seems more like a rule. I firmly believe it is the reason we're in the mess that we are in. Greed promotes bad management practices which undercuts employees' enthusiasm (key to getting good performance) which makes them treat customers poorly. At that point, you either need a near-monopoly or extremely low prices (Wal-Mart, anyone?) to lure in and keep customers. It's bad business, no matter how much money you might personally make in the process.

People who make a lot of money by wrecking people's lives (and livelihoods) and peddling irresponsible garbage should never be proud of themselves. People who build truly great companies (the kind that benefit everyone involved with them from founder to end-customer) should. Think about who you look up to and use your own money, no matter how much or little it is, to support the latter.

Bake Sale for NASA

I haven't posted any of my music or lyrics on here because I have been writing anonymously and I have had an issue with people trying to steal my intellectual property in the past. However, when Jen Scheer (@flyingjenny), one of my favorite SpaceTweeps (appropriate, as it turns out she started the group) asked to see the lyrics to the following song I realized that maybe it's not such a bad thing to mix these parts of my life. In fact, I feel like I'm starting to become CraftLass more and more in real life as well as online, since I've been meeting people in person who I first found online for the first time in years. Maybe that should become my new stage name as well as pen name...?

I also am quite proud of this song and think it's timely, so I'd rather have it spreading around regardless of if I ever make a dime on it than keep it to myself. I performed it last night for the first time and the response was very positive, with a few people going so far as to say it made them think about their own feelings about NASA and funding. I tried to make it as accurate as possible, using information from Wayne Hale's blog, NASA's website in general, and posts and tweets by SpaceTweeps as my inspiration. Who am I kidding? The song popped into my head and pretty much wrote itself while I was reading those things and watching the Augustine hearings more than the other way around.

Okay, here goes:

Bake Sale for NASA

We sent men to the moon because of some lines

In a speech that inspires to this day

We learn more about Earth from orbit

Than we can in any other way

Yet we spend and we spend and we spend and we spend

On corporate welfare that will never end

Programs that waste more than they create

Yet we’re happy to let NASA deflate

Chorus:

So let’s hold a bake sale for NASA

Show our love for a program that actually works

The cookies are sure to be out of this world

We could even have astros as clerks

Give folks a chance to learn first-hand

Why we need these adventures in space

How it affects them directly at home

And elevates the whole human race

A very large chunk of what sets us apart

Is our driving need to explore

Humans are best when we’re trying to test

Our limits and find we have more

The more that we learn the less that we know

So further on still we must go

To answer the questions that in the past

We didn’t even know to ask

Chorus:

So let’s hold a bake sale for NASA

Show our love for a program that actually works

The cookies are sure to be out of this world

We could even have astros as clerks

Give folks a chance to learn first-hand

Why we need these adventures in space

How it affects them directly at home

And elevates the whole human race

Bridge:

To turn this whole endeavor over

To private investors and other lands

Would be giving up the greatest power

We have in our nation’s hands

Some skeptics say we should keep funds at bay

Until we have fed everyone

But we produce more food than ever before

Because of what NASA has done

Nearly every invention created for space

On Earth has found a useful place

Saving some lives and improving many more

Like we’ve never seen before

Chorus:

So let’s hold a bake sale for NASA

Show our love for a program that actually works

The cookies are sure to be out of this world

We could even have astros as clerks

Give folks a chance to learn first-hand

Why we need these adventures in space

How it affects them directly at home

And elevates the whole human race

Bridge:

In these days where folks are always trying

To take real science out of schools

We need to step up our efforts

Or become a nation of fools

I could go on for days extolling the ways

Investment in NASA makes sense

But I have only this song to convince those who are wrong

And think it’s a wasteful expense

I will dare to say it’s our greatest success

Less than 1% is hardly excess

In a budget that keeps us all in debt

At least here we can see what we get

Chorus:

So let’s hold a bake sale for NASA

Show our love for a program that actually works

The cookies are sure to be out of this world

We could even have astros as clerks

Give folks a chance to learn first-hand

Why we need these adventures in space

How it affects them directly at home

And elevates the whole human race

Human race

Humans in space!!

(If you like these lyrics, I'm talking to a producer right now about trying to get at least a simple acoustic version recorded quickly and will post it here when it's ready, I promise!)

Also posted at the Space Tweep Society Blog.

Marriage, Timing, and a Dose of Reality

While I'm on the subject of marriage, can I rant about my other pet peeve that pertains to it? Oh, yeah, this is my own blog and I can write what I want, no matter how unpopular it may make me. I don't do this to get fans but to air out my brain, which is why I try to stay anonymous here.

Okay, to the topic at hand now:

My state, New Jersey, has a 3-day waiting period for a marriage license. Wisconsin has the longest in the country at 6 days. Nevada famously has none.

Waiting periods seem to frustrate people who wish to elope immediately, as hilariously portrayed in How I Met Your Mother a few seasons ago (the "Atlantic City" episode, to be specific). I have actually heard that complaint in real life, too.

So, here's my question for the world, why elope? I understand wanting to go do it alone if you have loved ones who might cause trouble if you announced your marriage, but I don't understand the immediacy unless one of you is about to deploy and is worried about survivor benefits (I still think that can easily be a mistake but at least there's practical logic behind it). Come to think of it, if your family or friends could ruin your decision to wed what chance does your marriage have?

Marriage is the second biggest decision you can make (after the choice to have children or not). Even with the option of divorce a marriage will affect the rest of your life. Shouldn't a whole lot of time be dedicated to considering such a leap?

People are amazingly good at hiding their true selves for about one to two years. Those under 30 are especially capable of this as they probably don't know themselves all that well yet (there are likely exceptions but I know that was true of all of the people I've ever come in contact with). According to the CDC, the chance of a marriage surviving goes up dramatically if the woman is over 25 (the highest age group they accounted for was 25 and up and they only surveyed women). I find that incredibly unsurprising despite the fact that I have been with my partner since I was 20. Then again, if we'd married back then we would almost certainly have divorced, there was plenty of turmoil and times where we thought it was over in the early years. Instead, we're a happy couple who are more bonded than I ever dreamed I could be with anyone and I give a lot of credit to the fact that we had the freedom to easily split up. We didn't even live together until just before our 10th anniversary.

An old acquaintance once told me that the main benefit to marriage was that it creates an extra hurdle to leaving each other, which makes trying to work things out more appealing. I disagree. To me, that extra hurdle can leave you feeling trapped and we all know how a wild animal reacts to being cornered. It's not pretty and rational thought is long gone at that point.

To those who say love isn't a rational thing and marriage should be all about love, well, you're right but any time you sign ANY legally-binding document there should be plenty of non-emotional thought put into it. Marriage is, first and foremost, a legal mechanism. Can you be 100% sure of the decision to marry? Of course not, but you can hedge your bets by taking the time to get as objective as possible about your prospects.

Love does NOT conquer all, either. Nor is it something that can happen at first sight, as one of my favorite people used to say, "It's really lust at first sight. Love takes a long time to develop, until then it's all about hormones and brain chemistry and those factors fade." Real love needs to be tested thoroughly as well. I have been through a lot of traumatic experiences and found that they can wreck a relationship or strengthen it. The latter is the kind of relationship that can last, as there is no avoiding a certain amount of catastrophes in life.

If you haven't spent a minimum of two years with someone, how can you have shared the experiences that give clues to how your partner reacts to stressful situations? If you haven't seen those reactions how can you even guess that you have the capability to survive real life together?

If anything, the waiting periods for marriage licenses should be lengthened and maybe we should even take a hint from the Catholics and their pre-cana requirements. I rarely agree with the Catholic Church on anything but my parents were pre-cana volunteers and many of my views were shaped by listening to their sessions with young couples. Quite a few had no idea what they were getting into before pre-cana and taking the time to talk about the reality of marriage not only taught them about what could be expected but they clearly learned a lot more about each other by participating in the process. If pre-marital counseling of any kind makes one or both partners uncomfortable how can you possibly expect to be able to work together effectively once legally bound?

Marriage is the beginning of a journey rather than a goal. You should prepare for the trip just as you would prepare for a long-term safari in a dangerous region without a guide or any other grand adventure.

Same Person, Different Rights

I was just reading a post I'd missed on my new favorite blog, Are We Married?, about the fight for equal parenting rights and it led me down a familiar mental path.

See, I'm in a very long-term committed relationship with a man, but I have a few ex-girlfriends in my past and have been truly in love with a woman in my life. I'm also very sensitive about

rights when it comes to the most important decisions a person can make, to marry and to have children. I'm marriagefree and childfree and proud of it. I haven't 100% written marriage out for some time in the future, I'm realistically flexible and can see some practical advantages to the institution, but I am not having kids under any circumstances other than taking in the children of those I care about if there is no other option but them going to strangers. I knew I didn't want to be a mother for certain when I was 3 and have yet to waver as of 33. To be perfectly honest, the thought of having a kid terrifies me more than jumping out of a plane did! Only one thought is scarier -- pregnancy.

My only problem with my decisions is the conversation I have had oh, so frequently with strangers. acquaintances, some family members, and even a few friends:

Them: "So, are you two married?"

Me: "No."

Them: "How long have you been together?"

Me: "About 12 years [or whatever amount it was at that point]."

Them: "Oh! That's a long time! Well, when are you going to get married?"

Me: "I'm not sure, probably never."

Them: "But what about the kids?"

Me: "We're not planning on having any."

And then, depending on religion or age group, they launch into one of several tirades. The most common is just that if I don't have children I will end up regretting it, which is funny because I refuse to regret things, it's such a waste of time and energy. Another regular is that I will lose my boyfriend if I don't give him a family, which is ridiculous as he doesn't want those things either and we ARE a family as it is, we certainly act more like one than many married people. My personal favorite was the guy who told me I should kill myself because I am not fulfilling my function as God's daughter. I am not joking, he was a cabbie who picked me up at JFK and drove me to Manhattan, a very long and strange taxi trip.

I know I could just lie or try to change the subject but why should I have to do that? I much prefer being proud of myself and my choices, even if it can be painful to hear the reactions.

Then I look back at my life and realize that I could be having such a different conversation if I'd settled down with a woman. The very same people who lambaste me for choosing not to marry or have children would be telling me that those are not even an option for me as long as they have their way. That would hurt a lot more. The concept that a decision I made to go out to the bar where I got to know my boyfriend one spring evening years ago could completely change my rights is mind-blowing.

I think about Guadalupe "Lupita" Benitez and how a clinic refused her access to IVF. I think about the droves of right-wing voters who came out for Prop. 8. I think about how people used to complain about gay couples having more disposable income than them because they didn't have children yet they don't want them to spend that money to become parents or support children.

What worries me more than the serious Christian Coalition-types, though, is the amount of generally rational, tolerant, accepting, and loving people I know who are pro-gay rights in every other way but are also anti-marriage equality. Why? Why does it affect you in any way? It's not like anyone is talking about taking away a heterosexual's right to marry.

People who love each other should be able to marry each other or not as they wish. People who want kids and can care for them properly should have them, people who don't and can't shouldn't. It's that simple. We have an awful lot of control over these things today, the capability for a whole new level of personal freedom and choice.

We need to strip away all the laws that take away anyone's rights and worry about people hurting each other instead of who we can continue to oppress and how to best oppress them. Politically, spiritually, and in our attitudes as well. If that happens it will be the moment America truly becomes The Beautiful.

The Biggest Threat to the Sanctity of Marriage

The answer is simple: Civil recognition of marriage.

How did I get there? Well, the first easy answer is divorce and I've been watching the campaign of John Marcotte since reading about it in the Huffington Post a few days ago with amusement and interest. See, I have been saying that for a few years now (it came up in an argument with my father, truth be told) that marriage lost any sanctity it may have had when divorce became a common thing, almost more of a rule than an exception. Couples go into marriage expecting that it will succeed but always knowing, in the back of their minds, that if it's a mistake they have a way out that may require a lot of hassle but is ultimately easier than it ever has been before.

One day while I was waiting for someone on 72nd Street in Manhattan I noticed a giant sign in a window that read, "Sale! Divorces $500!" It broke my heart.

I firmly believe we need a divorce mechanism, there are some brutally bad marriages that need dissolution. However, it makes no sense that two people of the same sex who take their vows seriously can't avail themselves of the option when divorce (a much larger threat to "traditional" marriage) is readily available with not much sacrifice beyond money and, hey, you can even shop for sales to help that part!

However, divorce does not really touch on the sanctity thing in the end, as it is a civil procedure that is in no way sacred. In fact, unless you are married in a religious institution according to it's laws and customs, there is no sanctity whatsoever in marriage. Marriages performed by a justice of the peace, a ship captain, or an Elvis impersonator are not sacred, they are secular and legal. If you are Catholic and divorced and remarried there is no sanctity, as the Church will not recognize such marriages and they are technically adultery even though accepted in general society. There are plenty of examples of taking the sanctity out of marriage that apply to heterosexual couples without even entering the realm of true adultery, domestic violence, or other abuses of the institution.

So, can we just let go of that term when we're talking about gay marriage?

Honestly, I understand why some people hate the semantics of this notion, but I think that it would be totally fine if everyone who married outside a religious institution was considered to have a "civil union" (regardless of anyone's gender) and people who took religiously sanctioned vows could use "marriage". Anyone could get a civil union and each religion could have free domain over their own marriage rules. Everyone could have the level of legal and societal protection that suits each couple while religious people could have their sacred ceremonies truly be sanctified rather than a religious/civil hybrid.

Ahhh, separation of church and state, what an original notion that seems to be these days!

What Does it Really Mean to Be a Married Gay Today?

I may seem like an unlikely proponent of marriage equality, as I'm generally not pro-marriage, have never wanted to marry, and live with a man who is my long-term partner. So, you'd think marriage laws wouldn't be a passion of mine, but I abhor inequality and anytime people are restricted from doing anything they would like to do that doesn't hurt (or, in this case, even affect most) other people.

So, gay marriage is a cause I care about to the bottom of my brain and heart. I would also like for society to accept people (especially women) who choose to never marry, but I think marriage equality may actually be a more achievable goal in this country.

Why am I bringing this up today? I followed a "Follow Friday" message from my friend (@souphead) and ended up on a new site by one of her friends, Ruby. Ruby is a very smart and funny lesbian who married her wife while it was legal in California and mother of one of the most beautiful babies around. The happy family has decided to take a road trip across America to ponder the question, "Are We Married?" and what it really means as they spend time in states with widely varying laws. I'm looking forward to following their story, I'm sure they will have wonderful and thoroughly horrible adventures along the way (based on my own experiences traveling around America as a non-traditionally-minded person) and that Ruby will wittily report on them all.

If this family isn't a perfect example of why marriage equality is vital to our citizens, I don't know who is.

It's impossible to understand how anyone can preach "family values" and yet tell two loving mothers who value their family above all that they are in breach of them. I am very smart with test scores to prove it and quite creative in many ways and yet I can not wrap my brain around how people even come to these notions that have no bearing on reality.

Regardless of where you stand on this issue you should read Ruby's blog and get a glimpse of what it really means to be married as a lesbian in this nation at this crossroads in public policy and private beliefs.

Next up: What is really the greatest threat to the sanctity of marriage?

Death Penalty Truly Does = Homicide

Capital punishment. Just the words make my blood run cold. I am not a great believer in the Bible but I have often thought that was one of the best lessons of the New Testament, that capital or even corporal punishment are not the way to handle justice on any level.

On a logical level, it is nearly impossible to know a person's actions with 100% accuracy. Even video can lie, heck, you could be standing there watching something happen and not know the truth. It happens all the time, even to highly observant types.

The only good argument I've ever heard for the death penalty can be summed up in Ted Bundy's escape from prison via a law library and the subsequent murders he committed before Florida put him to death. However, that level of cunning is rare and Ted Bundy is an exception to many "rules" of criminal behavior. We like to pin the label sociopath onto all kinds of criminals but the truth is they are incredibly rare yet share the trait of most criminals that the death penalty is not even slightly a deterrent to them. If anything, it just ups the stakes of the game and makes it more interesting.

Well, I'm off on a tangent again. The point is, I've always been against capital punishment, but today I read an article that made my veins particularly icy and included a sentence that, to me, is the truly unrefutable argument to be made against it: "On his death certificate, the cause was listed as 'Homicide.'"

I don't know if that's standard, but it certainly makes sense, as it is quite intentional and thus homicide. Still, to see that we completely admit that we, as a society, are committing homicide on a regular basis just makes a horrifying concept seem that much more contentious. I'd honestly never thought about what they put on the death certificate in such cases before.

Even scarier, what the article was largely about was the appalling state of arson investigation in this country. If you watch much prime time television you must have seen some amazing arson investigations using all sorts of gizmos and scientific methodology. Well, it turns out that is more fictional than I thought. "In 1997, the International Association of Arson Investigators filed a legal brief arguing that arson sleuths should not be bound by a 1993 Supreme Court decision requiring experts who testified at trials to adhere to the scientific method." Seriously? I don't even have words (and that is extremely rare, as you may know if you've been reading this blog). Arson investigators often claim their profession is more of an art than a science. I'm sorry, but if you are going to kill me over something, I'd like some solid factual science to be behind it. Luckily, in this case the Supreme Court agrees, but arson investigators are still grappling with the concept.

Why is this country so much more accepting of art than science? Alas, that will have to be a discussion for another day.

The excellent article from the New Yorker that inspired these thoughts is a long one but well worth the time:

Cameron Todd Willingham, Texas, and the death penalty: newyorker.com

Shared via AddThis