It's been six months since the last time I posted. I'm not sure what that says, considering that writing more was an overall goal of mine for the year. I wish I had a better reason than being tired and busy, which I think may just be a side effect of adulting.

These aren't really coherent thoughts, but I wanted to present a short list of things I've learned in my 25 years while I'm feeling kind of reflective.

1. Your heroes, even your biggest, most larger-than-life heroes, are people. They will make mistakes, and not always own them, and sometimes that will be okay.
2. Asking how someone is doing, and genuinely being interested in the answer, is one of the easiest things you can do to show you care.
3. You are under no obligation to make other people happy.
1. This is not open season to be a dick, though.
4. I am HORRENDOUSLY uncool. Accepting that you are uncool is the first step in living a slightly more liberated life. 
5. Sometimes self-care sucks: drink some water, take a shower, get out of bed, go to the doctor. It's good for you.
6. Sometimes self-care is great: bake cookies, eat cookies, take a bubble bath, pet a puppy. It's good for you.
7. Fighting is exhausting. Have fun with it or you'll burn out.
8. WEAR COMFORTABLE SHOES AND SUNSCREEN.
9. See #8.

Why Hillary’s Emails Mattered, but Bush’s Didn’t (And Neither Will Trump’s)

You may have heard by now, but high-ranking aides in the Trump White House are using their RNC email accounts. This may have you wondering: isn’t this exactly what everyone wanted to lock Hillary up over? I assume you may be wondering that, because that’s what’s been all over my newsfeed recently. What you may or may not be aware of, however, is that aides and Cabinet officials, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell, did the same thing during the Bush administration. As did other Cabinet officials under Obama.

So why, then,did Hillary’s matter so much when others’ didn’t?
Spoiler alert: It’s sexism.

More importantly, it’s the pervasive idea that women are inherently duplicitous, untrustworthy, or unreliable when it comes to the truth. Whether this trend started with the story of Eve is a question for Biblical scholars to think about – but it certainly is advanced by that story. Eve tricks Adam into eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and thus expels them from Eden, damning the human race for all eternity.

In her essay, “Cassandra Among the Creeps” (also included in her book Men Explain Things to Me), Rebecca Solnit uses the story of Cassandra to talk about the pervasive belief that women lie and men are hurt by it. Cassandra, a character in the Iliad who plays a part in the Trojan War, is cursed by Poseidon to see the future – but have no one around her believe her premonitions. Thus, when she sees visions of Troy burning, people assume she is mad or lying. From Cassandra, she moves to the (routinely discredited) claim that rape victims often lie about their assaults (taking a brief side-trek into Freud, but we’ll forgive that).

So what does Cassandra have to do with Hillary’s emails? Well, if Solnit’s theory about the myth of the duplicitous woman is to be believed – and I’m inclined to believe it – then there is far more to fear from a woman who is hiding something than there is when a man does the same thing. We can arguably believe that a successful man will know how best to delineate official and unofficial communications when conducting some official business on another email address (and deleting some, or yknow, 22 million, of those emails). But we’re conditioned to believe that successful women must have somehow broken the rules to get to where they are. That something in the 30,000 missing emails must implicate her for the shady dealings she had to undertake to get to where she’s at. Because somehow we can simultaneously believe that women are already equal while assuming that most successful women have slept or schemed their way to the top.

Why We Can't Be Friends Anymore

So, you voted for Trump. You might not understand why this means we can't be friends anymore. But we can't. This might seem petty and selfish, but you voted for Trump.

And with that vote:

You told my friends that they are not welcome here. You told my friends that their families, their faith, their futures are not welcome here. You told my friends that their love isn't valid. You told my friends that their lives don't matter, or at least don't matter as much as others. You told my friends that they don't deserve love and respect if they still speak another mother tongue or if their skin is black or brown or if they choose to stand for themselves or the land that is rightfully theirs.

And with that vote:

You have decided that our children don't deserve a good education unless their parents can pay for it. You've decided that our children don't deserve clean water unless their parents can move them. You've decided that our children don't deserve treatment and care unless their parents can afford it. You've decided that our children don't deserve a habitable environment to eventually raise their own children.

And with that vote:

You undermined your promise that sexual assault survivors would get justice. You undermined your promise that I and other women could be and do anything. You undermined your promise to respect the Constitution and the nation that it stands for. You undermined your promise to protect those in need. You undermined your promise that the meek shall inherit the earth.

You made a choice. And with that vote, you decided you didn't need me in your life anymore.

REINS on the Presidency

Today, House Speaker Paul Ryan announced a bunch of awful thing, including trying to push through an ACA repeal and defunding of Planned Parenthood. But one thing flew a bit under the radar in all of that. He cited the REINS Act, a bill which passed the House back over the summer.

The goal of the REINS Act is explicit and problematic: to completely hobble the executive branch before Obama leaves office and cut the power of Cabinet offices. It's a complete power grab by Congress. The Act would require all major regulations put forward by Cabinet departments to require congressional approval (whereas Congress can currently reject regulations with a vote). This means things like the Title X protections for Planned Parenthood or education reforms would all require Congressional signoff - making them virtually impossible.

This is a problem. Make no mistake - this is not a well-intentioned checks-and-balances test by Congress. It is a political power grab against the first black President and its intention is to strip away the powers of executive branches run by an opposing party - a direct threat to our constitutional democracy. Be warned.

Self-Care Sucks

Self-care sucks sometimes. Not long ago, my office organized a self-care day (which not everyone could attend, which is its own kind of problem) and there were manicures and massages - and many people keep advocating for stress puppies.

But days like that always get me thinking, as conversations around self-care come up (go to yoga! Stay hydrated! Take a bubble bath!). Because that's only part of self-care.

The other part of self-care, and what I would say makes up about 75% of it, really sucks.

Yes, self-care means bubble baths. But it also means dragging yourself to the shower when you've been lying in bed for too long. It means forcing yourself to eat your vegetables when eating itself seems hard. If you only focus on the easy self-care, it ultimately won't improve your overall mental health - and this is a problem.

Because some of the times I've felt the best in the middle of a dark spot have been after I forced myself to do something that sounded completely unbearable in the moment.

On the other hand, self-care is really important right now - so take care of yourselves, loves.

Have you ever gone to scream, only to open your mouth and have no sound come out? I think that's how I feel right now, and I think that's why I've retreated into writing.

Before I begin:
I love you. I know that things might be hard right now, and no one has a right to tell you that you don't deserve to feel or not feel exactly how much you feel right now. People will heal in their own time. Right now, unconditional love feels a bit like a radical act. Embrace it.

Now, on to the harder parts of this. If you have poured your heart into this election, let me first say that this is not your fault. The forces of complacency and white supremacy and hatred in this country won out, but this is not. your. fault. This loss does not rest on the backs of folks of color or women or marginalized communities, and this is not your fault. When you are ready to join the fight, there will be space. Until then, take care of yourself.

I'm still trying to process some pieces of this. I didn't want to believe that the worst parts of this country could come together in such a way to let this happen - but I also know that for a lot of folks, this is nothing more than a harder version of a battle they've been fighting for a long time. You have a right to lay down your armor, even just for a minute. I will try to protect you while you do.

I don't have a coherent plan, just a collection of thoughts and feelings and a newly-invigorated desire to fight hard and love harder in the face of a lot of darkness. Hold each other close.

Thinking

I've been thinking a lot about a lot of things these days. Like the fact that Planned Parenthood is turning 100, and reconciling a century of complicated but powerful history. Like anxiety and mental health and navigating a complex landscape of illness and wellness. Like the election and the work to still be done. Like how I've been thinking about how most women can point to a very young age when they first realized that men thought they had a right to their bodies. I've been thinking about a lot. I'm hoping to be able to make that coherent in the coming weeks.

Why You Shouldn't Vote for Gary Johnson (A Listicle)

This was originally the text of an email, but it seemed worth sharing.

1. He's only sort of pro-choice.
"Life is precious and must be protected. A woman should be allowed to make her own decisions during pregnancy until the point of viability of a fetus." (source: Johnson's 2012 campaign site, by way of ontheissues.org (a nonpartisan non-profit)). It should be noted that "viability" is a term that's disputed in the medical community and is typically used to be deliberately vague, but is often used to prop up 20-week bans.

Also: "I would have signed a bill banning late term abortion" (source:  2011 GOP Primary Debate)

2. He's opposed to the federal minimum wage.
Not raising it. The minimum wage. (source:http://secure.isidewith.com/candidate-guide/gary-johnson# Submitted by Johnson himself)

3. He supports Citizens United and opposes restrictions on campaign spending by corporations.
"Yes, any restriction on campaign spending violates the first amendment" (source)

4. When he was governor of New Mexico, the state's debt increased by almost $3 billion.
(source)

5. He vetoed early release of nonviolent offenders when serving as governor of New Mexico but is running on a platform of decriminalization to decrease the prison population. 

(sources:
"As governor, a highly-publicized bill was coming through the legislature, which would have allowed early release of prisoners due to overcrowding. When the bill passed, I vetoed it...Some representatives (including a few who were potential allies for me) were outraged because it made them look soft on criminals."(source)

"How is it that the United States, the land of the free, has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world? The answer is simple: Over time, the politicians have “criminalized” far too many aspects of people’s personal lives...These factors, combined with the simple fact that we have too many unnecessary laws, have produced a society with too many people in our prisons and jails, too many undeserving individuals saddled with criminal records, and a seriously frayed relationship between law enforcement and those they serve." (source: Johnson's campaign website))

6. He's opposed to mandatory vaccination.
I know this isn't an issue for everyone, but it's a big red flag in my book. (source: Johnson's Twitter)

7. He prides himself on viewing government the same way as Ayn Rand. No really, he wrote about it in Seven Principles of Good Government. "Overall, I think I view big government in the same way that the novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand did--that it really oppresses those that create, if you will, and tries to take away from those that produce and give to the non-producers."

8. He simultaneously supports "increased oversight" for fracking and "deregulating the energy sector," which to me seems contradictory. (source)

9. His 2012 platform supported a 23% national sales tax and the elimination of the IRS. 

As a reminder: sales taxes as the sole form of taxation are regressive taxes that most impact those who are already financially disadvantaged.

(source)

10. He's opposed to the Affordable Care Act (source) and the requirement that insurance companies provide birth control coverage. (source)

Other notes: He opposes any restrictions on firearms (source); He believes in climate change but no measures to stop it (or rather, only free market interventions) (source); I, for one, find his foreign policy underdeveloped and kind of incoherent (source, other source)

And a few reasons you might still like him: He says that banning immigration for religious reasons is unconstitutional (it is); He supports gay marriage; He supports the legalization of marijuana; He supports term limits for congressmen and opposes Voter ID laws; He's pro-space travel (Space!)

That being said, I don't think the pros outweigh the cons.

On Cybersecurity, Cyberterrorism, and IRL

In discussing Conflict Resolution, the broad category of terrorism often arises in course discussions.  Interestingly, the question recently arose about whether cyberterrorism will ever be seen as a concern as pressing as “physical terrorism.”  I suppose this was prompted by the recent digital attacks on companies like Sony, where the greatest loss is, perhaps, an inconvenience.

The concern seems clear – if the choice is between Blue Cross being hacked and people needing to double-down on their identity fraud protection and a bomb going off on a busy public street, shouldn’t the bulk of our time and resources be directed at the one which might pose lethal risk?

This distinction between “physical terrorism” and cyberterrorism relies, in large part, on a false dichotomy between the physical world and the digital world – as if physical objects are not often controlled by computers or other digital devices.  Many writers have talked about the disconnect between your life online and "IRL."  Except in a world where you can lock your front door from your phone, disable alarm systems from your laptop, and drone strikes are conducted from behind computer screens, making this assumption is not only unrealistic but irresponsible.

Thankfully, the U.S. government does not seem to be making the same mistake about assuming cyberterrorism is categorically different or less serious.  Two days ago, the President issued an executive order focusing on Cybersecurity.  While it’s great to see someone taking the possibility of a full-scale assault on communication networks seriously, it still seems to take the issue less than seriously, and also focus primarily on the communication and economic impacts.  You can read the White House’s summary of the initiative here.

Interestingly, the government should be among those who most know the physical implications of cybersecurity threats.  After all, with ties to the infamous Stuxnet virus that took out an Iranian nuclear facility, the U.S. government is fully aware of the potentially catastrophic risks to physical infrastructure and human life that can come from the undermining of digital networks.  But hey, that was an Iranian nuclear facility – and it’s not like there aren’t, you know, 1500 nuclear plants worldwide whose reactors were created by the same company and likely susceptible to the same or similar digital attacks.

Insecurely yours,

Rachel Leigh

On Food

I consider myself a foodie.  I love food.  Now, I've had people point out that a lot of people love food, because it's necessary to our continued existence.

But let me make myself clear: I am obsessed with food.  I follow Instagram accounts that profess their love to foods over human beings.  Food is bae.  I find myself obsessing over everything from the micro-level chemical reactions that occur when cakes bake or meat caramelizes to the macro-level composition of meals surrounding which food ought to be paired with which wine, beer, or other beverage pairing.

I can point to a moment in my life when I started obsessing over food: about 10 o'clock one Friday night when I was about 13, when I realized that I could watch Unwrapped on the Food Network when I was staying at my dad's house.  And then when I realized I could watch the Food Network when I woke up Saturday morning.  Or that I could watch Iron Chef at 3 AM when I couldn't sleep.  Food was solace when I didn't know what else to do.

The day I found out how to make brownies from scratch was a day that my life changed forever.  I had done some minor baking in Home Ec. and had been making some breakfast foods for years, but the moment I discovered baking from scratch, I discovered my sanctuary.

Baking and cooking are a form of stress relief for me.  When I am deep in perfecting a recipe, nothing in the world can distract me or make me feel less-than.  Even when the finished product is not quite what I've expected, the lessons I learn in the process only serve to drive me to learn more.

There is a part of me that has thought, at multiple times throughout my college and graduate school career, that I ought to drop out and pursue culinary school.  I've been asked if I've ever considered opening a bakery or pursuing a career as a food critic -- the fact is, I've strongly considered both.

I worry sometimes that following my love of food into a career would turn a pastime and retreat into a task on my to-do list.  They say that if you find a career you love, you'll never work a day in your life.  But I love academics, and I still find days when I need the escape.  To have my escape taken away would be absolutely heartbreaking.

Deliciously yours,
Rachel Leigh