A Tidy Life

 I’ve always been a bit of a disappointment. A misfit toy. Someone who, more often than not, resided somewhere outside the box. 

I haven’t always had the tidiest of lives. 

In my younger years, a tidy life meant that you were thought well of by the neighbors and you made your parents proud. Later on in life, as my world revolved around the conservative evangelical church community, a tidy life meant that your theology was right and therefore God wouldn’t be mad at you. 

I didn’t fit the mold as a kid. Or as a teenager. Or as a mother. Or as a wife. Or as a realtor. Or as a Christian. 

No matter the scenario, tidy and I were like oil and water. For a very long time this was a source of shame. 

When you have been on the receiving end of impossible expectations or at least ones that seem impossible for you to meet, you can go one of two ways: you can dish the same out to other people or you can do the opposite and fling your arms wide open. 

I’ve come to the understanding that God has never asked me to be tidy. That was a standard set up by other people due to their own discomfort with disorder, mess, and people in all their fragile humanity. 

And I’ve come to realize that I don’t want a tidy life.

 I want a REAL life. 

I want a life where compassion and curiosity and awe and kindness and understanding are more important than what things look like on the outside or whether or not they check some arbitrary box. 

I want people to feel the freedom to sit with me and let who they are, who they really are, spill out, knowing that there will be no judgment, no fixing, no disappointment. 

I want to understand deeply. 

I want to speak truthfully. And graciously. 

I want to give generously. 

I want to love extravagantly. 

That’s the life I want. 

Tidy be damned.

Tweet

The Martha Mitchell Effect and Believing Women

Every so often I come across some new story that just rocks my world in a “How am I just hearing about this?” way. 

Last week I learned about Martha Mitchell. 

Martha Mitchell was the wife of John Mitchell, Richard Nixon’s attorney general. 

Martha was a southern lady from Arkansas. She talked a lot and drank perhaps too much. She had a likable, folksy, opinionated way about her. 

When she heard some juicy piece of news that she thought the American people needed to know, she would call the press. The press loved her. The American people loved her. Richard Nixon? He did not. 

She was “The Martha Problem.” 

And she became more of a problem. She was in California when she learned of the Watergate break-in and immediately tried to call the press. She knew that Nixon was in on it. She knew. 

Her husband’s security detail caught her, ripped the phone out of the wall, had her tranquilized, and held her against her will for days. 

As time went on, as she tried to tell that she knew this was big, even her husband tried to pass her off as off her rocker. She had become unhinged, he said. 

Nobody believed her. Until they did. Until the evidence backed her up.

This was the 70s, of course. A time when women weren’t listened to. Weren’t believed. And were written off as unhinged on a regular basis. 

In the early 70s Diane Langberg was a fresh young psychologist. She would sit and listen as women began sharing with her stories their stories of sexual abuse. Abuse she had never encountered in her own life. Abuse she had never read about in any literature. Abuse she had never been taught about in her pursuit of 2 graduate degrees. As she remembers, “Often counselors were warned to not get ‘hooked’ into believing hysterical women. I chose not to heed the advice.”

She believed them anyway. 

Diane Langberg went on to become perhaps the foremost Christian authority on sexual abuse. 

Martha Mitchell died a short few years after the Watergate scandal. Perhaps her most lasting legacy is the phenomena that bears her name: The Martha Mitchell Effect.

According to the National Institutes of Health, “The Martha Mitchell effect describes a paradox in psychiatric evaluation where clinicians mislabel patients’ truthful accounts as delusions because they seem implausible from a clinical perspective, which can result in misdiagnosis and harm.”

What must it have been like to be Martha Mitchell? To be disbelieved? Silenced? Even told you are crazy? 

What must it have been like for women in the 70s to have a therapist who, unlike Diane Langberg, chose not to believe your stories of abuse and passed you off as hysterical? 

Unfortunately, I think a lot of us know what that’s like. Because we’ve been there. 

The sad reality is that not a lot has changed in 50+ years. Women are still written off as too emotional, perhaps unhinged. Our experiences are still disbelieved. Our concerns are still dismissed. 

Last fall I was spending the night with my granddaughter when I was awakened in the middle of the night by the sound of gun shots. I considered calling 911 but found myself hesitant. I didn’t want to be accused of making a big deal out of nothing, of making a mountain out of a mole hill. I didn’t want to be another “hysterical woman.” I didn’t call. 

 The next morning there were 6 bullet casings in front of my daughter’s house. 

Years of being dismissed take their toll. We women know this well. We are all too often left to the same fate as Cassandra of Greek mythology, who was cursed with the ability to tell the future but never believed. It crushes the soul. 

Something has got to change. But what? How? 

Maybe it starts small. With taking each other seriously. Believing each other. Maybe what we all need is a little validation that we aren’t crazy after all. 

Martha Mitchell finally got that, if not before her death, then certainly after it. 

An anonymous person sent flowers to her burial. White roses spelled out the phrase: 

Martha Was Right.

Tweet

On Leaf Blowers and Perspective

Perspective (according to me): Seeing something from a different angle than before that then changes your opinion or broadens your tolerance or challenges your belief. The more dogmatic your position, the more you may need perspective.

Example: Leaf Blowers

I used to hate, HATE leaf blowers. They are noisy. And while I find nothing quite so peaceful as the rustling of fall leaves in the breeze, all too often that peaceful sound would be interrupted by the obnoxious din of the air blowing monster known as the leaf blower.

Leaf blowers caused noise pollution. Air pollution. They were a menace to society.

I used speak with disdain about people using leaf blowers and then going to the gym for exercise because if they just spent some time raking up a yard full of leaves, they would get all the workout they'd need. After all, I was doing it. So should they.

I was very proud of my position, not to mention my physical prowess with a yard implement.

But then something happened.

It always does.

Perspective rarely changes of its own free will.

Enter the Tarlov cysts. They sit in my sacrum and, when inflamed, leave me feeling like someone has taken a baseball bat to my lower spine, butt, and lady parts. What inflames them? Lifting (anything more than two gallons of milk...some days way less). Pushing. Pulling. Bending repeatedly. All the things I do when I am doing the things I love, like moving furniture, hauling junk to the dump, mowing the lawn, raking leaves.

Raking leaves. Hmmmm. Suddenly, the only way I can do what I normally do is not with a rake and the good old muscles and grit of my prideful youth but with the dad gum leaf blower. The very machine I reviled for much of my adult life.

And now I am thankful for my leaf blower. My beautiful, hardworking leaf blower, that enables me to still, to some extent, be me.

And so, my friends, if you ever encounter a friend who seems to have changed, whether it's their opinion on something as mundane as a leaf blower or their formerly dogmatic belief about much more consequential things, just know that they may have changed because something happened and they see things differently now.

They got perspective.

Tweet

Tone Police

Jemar Tisby wrote yesterday,

"Here's how you knpow someone is 'tone policing' you and what might be going on. People don't comment on the content of your message, but they critique your delivery. You say something hard but true, and they slide in your comments telling you to be more 'gracious,' 'balanced,' or 'loving.' They shift focus from the injustice you're naming to the feelings your words provoke in them. Tone policing isn't about you, it's about them. They support justice intellectually, but emotionally resist the urgency, repitition, or directness that justice requires. Not only do they want to avoid their own discomfort, they want to make themselves superior. By telling you to soften your mesage, they're presenting themselves as 'balanced.' As the calm, rational voice above the fray. By contrast, you are the 'emotional,' 'angry,' 'irrational' one. Justice isn't polite. Discomfort is not an attack. Truth-telling requires a tone that matches the moral weight of the harm."

That's a lot of soak in. Mind that he's not saying that in everyday life tone doesn't matter. It does. We all do need to, for the most part, make sure that our tone toward one another is respectful and kind.

But....

But there are situations where someone speaks of a terrible wrong or grave injustice and, instead of that message being heeded and acknowledged and addressed, that person is chided for their tone, taking the entire focus off of the wrong or injustice.

Imagine backing over somebody's foot. You might not have even meant to back over their foot, but you did. In their pain the victim yells at you and, instead of rushing to their aid, you stop and tell them that you don't like their tone. That their emotional display is offensive, that they need to learn to communicate better, and that the shattered bones in their foot are no reason to raise their voice.

That would be truly ridiculous and you would wonder what sort of person has such a fragile ego that they can't handle a little harsh language from a someone with a deep wound.

A few years ago this happened to me. I sent an email to a group of people who had cause profound spiritual wounds to both me and a member of my family. I had waited years to communicate as it took me that long to be able to write without the emotional intensity that I knew would be offputting. I pleaded with them to reconsider their words, asking how those words looked anything like Jesus.

I got no reply. I was told I would be getting no reply. And when I asked why I would get no reply, I was told that my "tone seemed harsh and accusatory." End of story.

Their lack of response to my genuine and heartfelt plea absolutely crushed me. It still takes my breath away.

Who, when learning of something they did that caused incredible damage, doesn't respond? That is kindergarten level interpersonal skills. "Tell Jimmy you are sorry" type stuff.

I honestly don't understand the "you are not worthy of a response" and then throwing in my tone as an excuse.

Imagine putting it on the wounded or oppressed to soften their tone, twist it into some acceptably tasty pretzel, and package it in a palatable way in order for you to believe they deserve any help or even a basic apology.

Let's be careful not to tone police those who are expressing their pain, even when they express it in ways we find distasteful, intense, or even threatening. Let's try to look beyond the tone to the "moral weight of harm." Let's acknowledge that harm and, if it is within our power to do so, let's do something about it.

Tweet

Souls First

Yesterday at St. James, our rector, Judith, reminded us that we are souls first and it got me wondering. What would happen to us, to our relationships, to our culture, to our society, if we really believed that?

Imagine the impact on:

-the cosmetics industry

-the cosmetic plastic surgery industry

-the fashion industry

-the diet industry

Imagine the impact on prejudice and racial profiling and viewing people as the “other.”

Imagine how we would view our own accomplishments and those of others.

What would happen if all those things that we think make us who we are, make us impressive, popular, wanted, valuable…what if all those things were taken away?

In her TED talk “You Are Not Your Body,” former champion cross country skier Janine Shepherd describes life in the spinal ward after a devastating and life-altering bike accident. The patients were flat on their backs, unable to see one another. Their lives forever changed. They were there together, souls sharing their deepest thoughts and feelings, with one another. One day a nurse brought in straws and had the patients work the straws together, end on end, into a string. That nurse then formed a circle with the straws and each patient held on. Souls connected by tragedy and plastic straws.

What would happen if the playing field was leveled and all we had was each other, without all the things that we believe give us an advantage in life? What if all we are is a collection of souls, connected to one another by a circle of straws?

How would we treat each other then? How would we value each other? How would we value ourselves when we aren’t clambering to the top of the social ladder, seeking approval, proving our significance, or failing in comparison?

We’ve been sold a lie. We have bought into the idea that that which is visible is that which is valuable.

Some of us need to be reminded, perhaps others of us need to be told for the first time, that we are souls first.

That weird kid in algebra class is a soul first. That the homeless person standing at the bottom of the exit ramp, begging for food or money or a job, is a soul first. That the tired looking disheveled woman wandering the aisles of Walmart in her pajama bottoms, looking like she could use a good night’s sleep, some personal discipline, and a fitness plan, is a soul first.

The gay neighbor is a soul first. The gender fluid kid behind the counter is a soul first. The immigrant suffering in an ICE facility is a soul first. The old guy with a MAGA hat is a soul first.

That person who doesn’t look like you, act like you, vote like you, or value the same things you do, is a soul first.

And you, when you look in the mirror, stand on the scale, try on the dress that doesn’t fit, peek at your bank account, count up your professional successes or failures, assess your storehouse of knowledge or your stockpile of skills…you must, must remember that you are a soul first.

This morning my granddaughter started her first day of eighth grade. She was as dolled up as I have ever seen her, having told me that her goal for today was to look good. I want so badly to let her know, to get through to her hormone rattled, developmentally restructuring teen brain and her tender heart that, as beautiful as she is, she is and always will be, a soul first. 

Tweet

When Preferences Become Mandates

 Anybody who is part of the evangelical church or a conservative congregation of other

stripes knows that it is relatively common to encounter someone who has decided that

doing things a certain way is the "biblical" way to do it. Whether it's how you parent, how you

run your family (and who's in it), how you teach your kids, what kind of church you attend

and how that church goes about worship and engaging with the community, all the way to

how you dress or who you vote for or whether you vote. It is not hard to find someone who

has a certain opinion or has made a specific choice and then spells out the case that that is

THE biblical way, and they can often expertly lob diced up chunks of Bible at anybody within

throwing distance just to prove their point.

Years ago there were the Worship Wars, wherein people would sit around and debate,

whether in person or on the interwebs, the value of hymns vs praise songs, traditional

worship vs contemporary. And each side had their talking points, all effectively ignoring

Ephesians 5:19, which mentions "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs," so it's all included.

But people were very opinionated about these things. They could get testy.

Then there’s schooling. Home school vs Christian school vs public school. There was some

bizarre pecking order to it all, as if this was an intensely spiritual choice (though some had

no choice at all). This issue could ruin friendships and split churches and crush the spirits

of many an overwhelmed mother.

I've done it, too. I've had convictions, or maybe just preferences but I called them

convictions, and decided I was doing something the way God wanted. And then I changed

or grew or something happened to force me out of my bubble or to see things differently or,

at times, I was left with no choice in the matter, and realized that what I really wanted was a

biblical rationalization for what was my preference. I wanted someone to back me up so I

wouldn’t have to fight so hard for what I really wanted.

Because it wasn’t ok to just want something and then go for it.

Maybe it is because people, especially in the more authoritarian churches, families, and

cultures, aren't ever given the freedom to have their own opinions and preferences to begin

with. We learn to do and say as we are told. So what do we do? Our only way to rationalize

our preferences is to say that this is God's preference, no, God's mandate, to do it this way.

When wants are not ok and when children are taught obedience above all else, they don’t get to

develop a sense of agency. Because when parents’ choices and dictates matter most, and

matter above all else, and come with the authority of God, a child doesn’t get to be her own

person with her own wants and desires. When everything is spiritual, then our wants have to be

spiritual, too. Our preferences have to have the spiritual stamp of approval.

So what if all of this pontificating really is just a way of getting validation for a preference

you don't feel you have a right to have outside of some divine ordinance?

What if we gave kids, women, and people of all shapes, sizes, ages, and genders, the agency

to make decisions and like and not like things and use their gifts and or make use of other

people's gifts in the ways that they best see fit without having to wrap everything in spiritual

packaging?

What if we were able to see someone else's choices as just that, choices made based on

their situation and the factors that play in their lives, and not some spiritual failing.

Maybe we should back off with the Divine Mandate Heavy Hammer and let people be

people. Not right. Not wrong. Just people being people, doing things people do.

God gives us the freedom to do that.

Tweet

Seeing Color

 When George Floyd was so tragically murdered in May 2020 at the hands of his local law enforcement, turning the spotlight yet again on the hideous history of racism in our country, I heard over and over the phrase, “But I don’t see color.”

It is, in many ways, a hopeful sentiment and, on some level, one to be respected. Of course we are to afford one another equal treatment, regardless of color of one’s skin. Isn’t that what Martin Luther King, Jr. longed for? That one day his children would not be judged by the color of their skin but the content of their character.

But the problem is that when we say, “I don’t see color,” what we are really saying is, “I don’t see YOU.”

We cannot divorce a person’s color(or gender or ethnic identity) from the experiences that have formed them. It is naive, at best.

When I say that I don’t see color, then I say that I don’t see that you are Black. And if I say I don’t see that you are Black, then I am free to dismiss your life experience, your culture, your world. I can live in my vacuum, seeing things only from my perspective, without ever having to step into your shoes and see through your eyes.

Which got me thinking about DEI...

This is one of the reasons that embracing diversity, equity, and inclusion is so important.

What if…what if DEI is less about giving someone an opportunity and more about recognizing that that person brings something valuable to the table that we don’t have.

When we think of DEI we think of us doing them a favor, with us being the dominant demographic. The one with the power. In our country with our culture and our history, "us" has been the white, male, heterosexual, able-bodied person.

We think that we are being nice and lowering the bar so that those who don’t fit the mold can have a chance. And I’m sure that perhaps that has happened in some instances because sometimes somebody does need a more gradual entrance ramp, sometimes literally.

But I have also heard that DEI hires have to work harder. And I can certainly see this being the case what with perceptions and all. (I certainly know how hard it can be for a woman to be heard and taken seriously in a space dominated by men.)

But, what if….what if there’s more to DEI. What if the real point of DEI has less to do with giving the marginalized a chance and more to do with welcoming and embracing and even needing what they bring to the table.

You may see yourself as a hero for opening the job to a minority, but without the viewpoint of that particular person, your team might be handicapped.

If every employee within a workplace, be it military or civilian, is of the same demographic…white, straight, male…it is likely that each employee is bringing a very similar life experience to the table. One that may be shared by other straight, white men but one very foreign to the rest of the population.

A home inspector once told me about a situation where he and a pest inspector were in a very tight crawlspace under a house. They were both looking for signs of pest damage, mold, or anything else of particular concern. Because the space was so tight, they could look ahead at the floor joists in front of you, but couldn’t look behind them to see the other side of the joists. So the inspector crawled through the space clockwise and the pest inspector crawled counterclockwise and that way they were able to inspect both sides of the floor joists.

We need people who have seen life from a different perspective. We need people who have experienced life crawling counterclockwise, if you will.

If you think about it, the whole anti-DEI thing is pretty arrogant. You are saying, “I don’t need that perspective.”

Yes, you do. We all do. We all need the perspective of someone not like us. And that starts with seeing that they are not like us (seeing their color) and valuing that.

Wendell Berry said, “You have to be able to imagine lives that are not yours.”

What better way to do that than to give them a seat at the table.

Tweet