Do You Have Something to Say?

…if you do, email me your piece and any other personal information you are willing to disclose (your name, age, w/e.) if you don’t want your name on the article, it will be written by “anonymous.”

Submit anything from life stories to fiction stories. Persuasive essays and articles are also welcome. In general, they should be about anything you feel strongly about in our society, for example LGBT issues. of course, they don’t have to be about LGBT issues.

Furthermore, all submissions will be edited by me before going onto the blog. If you have any issues with this, include it with your email, and i’ll send you back revisions until they’re to your liking.

My email is dekim@taftschool.org

Thank you!

- S.

Following RMA: The Support

The Respect for Marriage Act, a long overdue bill that promises to overturn the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), has reached the House of Representatives. However, once a bill reaches the House, it doesn’t mean that the bill will pass. The United States Government was designed to move extremely slowly, so slowly that Health Care Reform, first introduced by Kennedy so many years ago, is finally being substantially considered. This is the first time that a bill like RMA has even been heard of, much less introduced to the House.

Keep in mind, however, that RMA does have a good amount of support.

First and foremost, the bill has the undivided support of the President. Mr. Obama, although he does not believe in gay marriage (instead, he supports national civil unions), supports RMA, and believes DOMA to be completely and utterly discriminatory. So, if the the House were to ever pass RMA, the President is sure to stamp his approval.

Further support for RMA stems from its very birth: RMA has a total of 90 initial co-sponsors, an incredible number.

However, opposition to RMA doesn’t only come from the masses of anti-gay individuals. In fact, members of the LGBT community oppose RMA. Openly gay congressman Barney Frank (of Massachusetts) is opposed to RMA. He believes that introducing a bill like RMA would get in the way of other important LGBT issues (ENDA, DADT, so on). Furthermore, Frank believes that the bill has little to zero chance of being passed anytime soon (an unfortunately accurate prediction), and that the current debate surrounding RMA focuses on whether or not a state should recognize a marriage, despite its respective sexuality. The debate should concentrate on, Frank says, on whether or not the federal government should treat people fairly period.

RMA is a long awaited bill that will fully overturn DOMA. We don’t know if it will pass soon or multiple years down the line. If RMA is passed, great positive strides will have been taken concerning treatment of the LGBT community. However, I do have to agree with Congressman Frank. RMA is important, but not as important as bills like ENDA.

We must not lose focus.

Respect for Marriage Act

Two days ago, history reached Congress.

I honestly thought that this day would never come. In fact, I am still in shock. I am speechless.

Two days ago, the Respect for Marriage Act (RMA) reached Congress. During President Clinton’s term, the Defense of Marriage Act was written and was reluctantly signed by the then democratic administration. DOMA would infringe upon all LGBTQ rights everywhere… No married gay couple would receive the rights that they deserve. But now, RMA was written, and DOMA might finally actually be repealed.

I am still in shock.

If RMA is passed and DOMA repealed, I swear I will take to the streets. We all should.

There is strong support for RMA, and celebration is due.

Maybe. Just maybe.

Safe Sex for Dykes

We all know how to have safe straight sex. And I’m sure we all know how to have safe gay sex.

But what about safe dyke sex?

Fortunately, none of us have to really worry about getting knocked up… Unless women somehow gain the ability to spit out sperm. The biggest concern is STDs. HIV. That kind of thing. There’s two sides of the argument when it comes to dyke sex: one, safe sex – dyke or not – is the way to go. The second opinion is that there’s no real major concern with unprotected dyke sex. Or, just don’t overdo it.

Now, considering the type of Google results that come up when you type in “safe lesbian sex” or any of its other variants, I’ve decided to help out. Now you don’t have to look at porn! (Don’t worry; I won’t trick you).

http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/sex/a/safersex.htm — Just a quick and basic overview for safe lesbian and bisexual sex.

http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/sex/ht/Glove.htm — How to make a barrier out of a glove. Interesting, no?

http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbiansex/a/LubeforLesbians.htm — Lube for dykes! A very comprehensive list.

http://aids.about.com/od/tipsforsafersex/qt/safeoral.htm — Safe oral sex. For women and for men.

 

That’s all I have for now, but if and when I find more, I’ll be sure to throw it out there.

The Harvey Milk School

The Harvey Milk School seems like something out of a fairy tale… A gay fairy tale of course. Just listen to the students of the school. Watch their eyes and faces as they describe this environment. This community.

You walk in and you’re bombarded with rainbow. Hell, it’s probably the most colorful public school in all of the United States. Down the hall you’ll see two girls holding hands, or two guys holding hands. Beside you there might be a man… who’s really a woman. And maybe there’s a woman… who’s really a man. It seems too good to be true, but this is the Harvey Milk School, and it’s as real as hell. All of this just described… Well it’s normal. This is just another day in the the life of a Harvey Milk student.

The Harvey Milk School is a public school in NYC, created and designed to provide a gay friendly environment for at-risk students. And don’t get me wrong, it’s not exclusively for the LGBTQ community. Though they are the minority, there are actually straight students. A few of them, actually.  Because of the openness in sexuality, barriers seem to have fallen (from what I’ve heard).

This summer, six of us took the train to the Village, and went to an independent bookstore where the reading of “I Know I’m Not Me” was going to take place. We sat down in the folding chairs and listened as people went up to the microphone and read sections of the book. The book is an anthology written by the Harvey Milk students, about their experiences being gay at their first schools, and then coming into Harvey Milk. 

Here’s an excerpt:

“I move away and look around to see all of these smiling kids talking and throwing kisses at each other — guys giving other guys a kiss on the cheek! Girls are with girls. Some I will find out later are straight, too. Some I can’t tell if they are guys or girls. None of it matters – everyone is different with their own identities and nationalities, religions, sexualities.” – Daniel Marrero.

The book is definitely worth checking out.

And, if you live near the NYC area (and I believe even in areas close enough to be commutable to NYC), check out the Harvey Milk School. Besides the fact of its LGBTQ presence, it is actually a good school, with a high college acceptance.

Note: The Henrich Martin Institute (home of the Harvey Milk School) hosts after school programs for LGBTQ youth.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: Logic? Where?

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), for some reason, angers me more than any other of the discriminatory laws against the LGBTQ community. It seems to me the most ridiculous, the most illogical of them all. Not only does it defy the Constitution (where it says that those who serve in the military must take an oath to preserve the tenets of the US Constitution, where it also says no law shall limit a person’s civil rights and his/her pursuit of happiness and that there can no longer be a ’separate but equal’ clause), but it also makes no sense in the context of the opponent’s usual tirade of anti-gay speeches.

First of all, I can understand (but not agree, never agree) with the opposition’s aversion towards gay marriage. They have created a tenet for themselves and, in fact, many of those anti-gay Christians oppose gay marriage but are actually in support of gay people. I don’t agree with the stance that they’ve taken, but I can see that little shred of logic that they’re hanging on to.

But does the Bible ever say anywhere, even when taken out of its context, even when the meaning is skewed to its greatest degree (as is done with gay marriage), that gays cannot serve openly in the military? The Homosexual Conduct chapter of military code, in fact contradicts the oath that all military servicemen and women must take, that they will not lie or commit falsehood. But under DADT, it is expected of gay military to hide and lie their sexuality. Oh?

Furthermore, who is to say that being gay limits one’s ability to serve in the military? What is it about being gay that makes one unfit for the battlefield? You know, I’ve heard the argument that gay men will go out onto the field and will worry more about breaking their nails than anything else. That’s bullshit. This is the 21st century, and enlisting in the military is voluntary. People who enlist generally know what they’re getting into. And because gay men and straight women are usually synonymous with each other, couldn’t you say that straight women would be the same? And since dykes and straight men are usually synonymous with each other, couldn’t you say that dykes would be ‘okay’ in the military? You would think, no?

From my own experience, I know that coming out of the closet and being openly gay has made me much more confident than before. I have a greater sense of who I am, and I therefore have a greater sense of my abilities. I am confident. Then imagine all the gays in the military, condemned to remain closeted. They too would be more confident, I think, if they came out of the closet. And if they were more confident, couldn’t they serve better? The Athenians knew it; they military actually encouraged gay lovers, and put them side by side in battles, so that they would fight harder. The Spartans (arguably one of the greatest military forces in history) knew it; they encouraged gay lovers too.

Now, while DADT is simply through and through immoral, it’s just plain stupid. I mean, forget the morals of whether or not gays should be in the military or not. But let’s look at the situation, this awful predicament that we’re in. With the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan, we need soldiers. It’s true; we simply do not have enough. In fact, CNN recently reported that many US soldiers are being deployed internationally up to four times a year, to areas in the Middle East. This puts a strain on both the soldiers and their families. The psychological strain on the soldiers is rising exponentially, and reports show that military suicides are on the rise. Not only do we need more soldiers in general, we need more specialized servicemen and women in the military. In fact, many of the gays who have been dishonorably discharged were Arabic translators (or other special professionals), the type of soldier the military is now actually lacking.

Long story short, DADT is immoral. It’s illogical and it’s immoral. But beyond that it’s just stupid, and we have to ask ourselves; in this time of crises, can we afford to let go of these important soldiers?

Free Music Downloads: It’s Time to Rethink

Programs like Limewire are letting people download countless songs for free. And people are liking it.

I hate to play the devil’s advocate in this situation, but I have to ask… What about the artists? These musicians need money… to pay the rent… to pay for medical care… to eat food. And the songwriters are in desperate need of this money too. It’s hard enough to be an artist without having to worry about whether or not they’ll actually get paid or not.

Now, I see two major arguments facing artists and songwriters concerning the free download of songs. One, people oftentimes say that artists should perform as a passion. As a hobby. Two, it’s also said that artists are jacking up the price of concert tickets these days, so it serves them right.

Let’s deal with argument number one first. If artists performed one the side, that’s it for the music industry. Playing professionally is time consuming, and I can imagine it’d be difficult to uphold a substantial career while, at the same time, playing music. It’s also not fair to say that, because music is an art, musicians should be imparting their music for free. Well, no. You have to pay to get into MoMa, don’t you? And you have to pay to buy a piece of art, right? If we want the music industry to survive and thrive in the way it has, we have to remember that artists can’t work for free.

Now for argument number two. Yes, concert ticket prices are going up. But let’s look at why. Well, if artists aren’t getting money for their songs, they have to equalize some other way, right? How else are they going to pay for rent? For food? Not everyone makes it big time, you know. So, I’ll say this. It definitely is not fair to complain on the rise of concert tickets while, at the same time, Limewire is running on your computer.

However, I don’t like paying for all those songs either. It’s just… too much.

The problem here is, I think, two fold. First and foremost, this Internet age should be, right now, biting the music industry’s ass. It’s a fucking wake up call. The rest of the world is progressing, and fast. If the music industry wants to survive, it needs to keep up with all these up and coming technologies. Adapt to the Internet, my friends, and don’t just fine college students millions of dollars.

And to the consumers: until the music industry actually figures this whole thing out (being on the brink of destruction has oftentimes saved certain industries), I advise to minimalize the amount of songs downloaded for free. I’m not saying stop completely. All I’m saying is keep the artist in mind.

I say this to all other music enthusiasts… The music industry is failing. Let’s help it.

Girl meets Girl

With the straight community [over]populating the world (oh! a joke!), decent lesbian media can be hard to find… And when I mean media, I mean the realm that is not porn. Sorry breeder boy.

Movies

Imagine Me and You – Directed by Ol Parker and starring Lena Headley and Piper Perabo, here’s a dyke chick flick. Set in the U.K., Rachel (Piper Perabo), is getting married when she meets the out lesbian Luce (Lena Headley). Plot ensues. This movie was very well made, very cute, and more of a chick flick than anything else. Guaranteed smiles.

The Birdcage – This is not a dyke movie…. But it’s still great and worth mentioning. A hilarious portrayal of an awkward situation. The straight Val Goldman (Dan Futterman) is getting married and is taking his fiancee (and her very republican parents) to meet his own parents for the first time. His dad Armand (Robin Williams) owns a drag club… and his other dad’s the star.

But I’m a Cheerleader! – I don’t think it’s the best made movie, but it’s decent, and it’s got a fantastic plot line. Natasha Lyonne plays Megan, a naive teenager with a boyfriend… Until she’s outed, to her confusion. She’s sent away to a “redirection” boot camp (one of those “ex-gay” things… like Exodus), and she actually ends up meeting Graham (Clea DuVall). Could be better made but it’s a movie definitely worth watching.

Loving Anabelle - Anabelle (played by, in my opinion, the very hot Erin Kelly) is sent away to a Catholic boarding school. Providing she’s a lesbian, it’s quite the problem, no? And then she meets Simone (Diane Gaidry), one of her teachers… Yes, my friends, it’s a student-teacher relationship. Steamy, no? Well made. A good movie. This movie is available free to watch on Logo.com (more on that later). But internet quality’s not all that great.

The L Word - Illene Chaiken (directer of Showtime’s the L Word TV series) is thinking about releasing a movie, in the L Word’s wake. It’s no guarantee, but rumor has it it’s in the works. Supposedly, it’ll be about (SEASON SIX SPOILERS!) who exactly killed Jenny. Considering the outcome of the series, I look forward to seeing a movie. If it does come out, I recommend watching it.

TV Shows

The L Word - A fantastic dyke TV show. I loved it through and through and am extremely disappointed about it’s ending after Season Six. There’s nudity and sex, but the great thing about the L Word is that it’s more about the relationships rather than the sex. Thank god, right? Jenny Schecter (Mia Kirshner) arrives in West Hollywood to live with her boyfriend, Tim. Her new neighbors are Bette Porter (Jennifer Beals) and Tina Kenard (the out lesbian Laurel Holloman) are a longtime couple. Jenny meets Marina (very hot Karina Lombard), the lesbian owner of the Planet, the cafe where the cast of characters hang out. Shane (Kate Moennig) is the lesbian heart throb. Dana (Erin Daniels) is the closeted pro tennis player, and Alice (the second out lesbian Leisha Hailey) is the bisexual journalist. For six seasons, characters come and go, but it’s a great show. I have to say, Moennig makes Shane the best reason to watch the L Word. You’ll see what I mean.

Exes and Ohs - I haven’t actually watched this show before, but I’ve been meaning too, since it looks pretty good. Jennifer is a documentary filmmaker trying to find “Ms. Right,” but she needs to learn all the rules of the lesbian society. Her friends Sam (a commitment-phobe playboy type lesbian), Chris and Kris (a longtime lesbian couple), and Crutch (a young musician) help her out. It looks pretty good, so I’d recommend checking it out.

South of Nowhere - This is a mediocre to decent T.V. series. I’ve only seen season one, so I don’t know how much better it gets (if it gets better). The story focuses around Spencer (Gabrielle Christian) and Ashley (Mandy Davies). Spencer’s family (complete with the jock jerk and the foster child brother genius) moves to LA. There, Spencer befriends Ashley, the school dyke. Romance ensues. Even though I consider the series to be pretty mediocre, I think it’s worth checking out (it’s good material when you’re really bored).

Books

I Know I’m Not Me - This book is an anthology written by students of the Harvey Milk School (a NYC public school dedicated to providing a safe community to LGBTQ students. It’s like gay heaven there. And it’s real) about their experiences coming out and being gay. These real-life stories are touching and relatable, and even tells of this heaven the Harvey Milk School. It’s definitely worth a read.

Fingersmith - A lesbian novel set in Victorian times. I haven’t actually read the book myself, but it was good enough to get a movie made from it. Sounds like a good read.

Straight Fiction - Unfortunately, I’m not yet well read in LGBTQ fiction, so I haven’t read this one yet either. It’s a satirical take on a world where straights are the minority… and gays rule.

[I'm sorry to say that, while there seems to be many M/M fiction out there, quality lesbian fiction seems to be on the diminishing side. All you writers better help me out on this front!]

Music

Joan Jett and the Blackhearts – Joan Jett, now 50, has had an extensive career, dating back since she was sixteen. A rocker through and through, she’s still releasing albums (her latest one, Sinner). She’s ambiguous on her sexuality (I personally think she’s gay), but she’s definitely going strong on the whole pro gay rights thing. Thanks Joan for the sticker: “Dykes Rule.”

Fun Fact: After the production of the ACDC (a song about a bisexual woman) music video, Joan Jett and Carmen Elektra (star of the music video) were caught hooking up.

The Indigo Girls - A well known dyke band. Check it out.

Podcasts

Girls on Girls - Two lesbian comedians, Anne Neczypor and Jackie Monahan, team up to make this hilarious podcast… all about lesbianism. Check it out.

Dykes on Mykes - Based in Montreal, Dykes on Mykes talks about the lesbian world… through interviews, popular music, and some ‘dykey’ conversations.

—————————-

I hope you enjoyed my [less than comprehensive] list of lesbian media. In the later years (when I’m much more well read) I’ll throw in some additions. If you have any additions, let me know.

Look out for a Transgender list in the future.

ordinary.freakshow’s Marijuana Special

The Governor of Georgia has recently made a statement saying that he wants to up the War on Drugs and has suggested to cane marijuana offenders and to execute marijuana dealers.

On that note, here’s the ordinary.freakshow’s “Marijuana Special.”

Enjoy.

I’ll begin by saying that I have never smoked pot. Not once. I haven’t even lain a finger on it.

But I’m all for legalizing pot. In fact, I’ll give you the Top 5 Reasons for Legalizing Pot.

1. It’ll help out the economy.

That’s right. Legalizing Pot will actually help out the economy. How? Well it’s two-fold. First of all, the majority of America smokes pot, and the drug dealers are getting all the money from the sold drug. It’s literally a million dollar industry. Now, imagine taxing pot. And that there is a lot of money going into the economy. Furthermore, with other industries failing, introducing a new industry would do well. When the Prohibition on alcohol was finally lifted, factories began to open up. Two things happened: a surge in stimulus, and a surge in employment. The same can be expected to occur with marijuana.

The second part of the equation is the money saved. Did you know we spend $40 grand on each inmate caught with 2 pounds of pot per year? That’s per year, per inmate. For all you Tafties or other boarding schoolers, that’s one year’s tuition. For keeping a guy in jail. The War on Drugs is costing the United States billions and billions of dollars. Don’t you think we have bigger things to worry about?

2. Despite popular belief, marijuana is actually NOT bad for you.

Well, it isn’t good for you, but in relation to the legalized tobacco, it’s not bad at all. First of all, there is not yet any proof that marijuana causes cancer. Furthermore, marijuana does not contain any addictive substance. That’s right. Marijuana is not addictive. There is no nicotine, no nothing. If marijuana is ever bad, it’s because drug dealers actually lace weird stuff into the drug, to make selling it more profitable (use less weed) and to get their customers coming back to them. Legalizing it would eliminate these things. Drugs in Amsterdam, for example (where everything is legal), are clean and cause less mental and bodily harm.

And before you say that marijuana is the gateway drug to all other worse drugs, it’s actually proven that marijuana is NOT the gateway drug, and the legalized alcohol is actually the gateway substance. But to continue on the premise that pot could be the gateway drug, people (and this is a general consensus) start using pot because they know it is not a bad drug. The only reason they begin to use other worse drugs is because the drug dealers begin to give their customers more addictive substances, to rope them in (because, as said, marijuana is not addictive). Remove the drug dealer out of the process, and there’s no gateway to go through. People know that coke is bad. People know that heroin is bad. That’s why more people smoke pot.

3. Restrictions (that don’t exist with pot now, since it’s not legal) can be put in place.

Keep in mind that I’m not saying that pot should be completely legalized without limits. Oh no. That would be a horrible idea. Here’s a thought: Meth can be made out of Sudafed. So, the government monitors how much of that kind of Sudafed goes out to each person. In every pharmacy. Now think about how many Duane-Reades, and CVS’s, and Rite-Aid’s line the streets of New York. So, before you say it’s not possible to monitor how much pot goes out to each person, think again.

And here’s another thought that my 12 year old brother actually came up with. Forms. Yes, forms. Like in Gun Control. People must apply for a license to smoke or possess pot. And also, implementing DUI laws concerning pot would be a good idea.

4. Legalizing pot can actually REDUCE the amount consumed.

There’s always a thrill to doing something illegal. It makes you badass, doesn’t it? People are drawn towards what they are told not to do. That’s one of the reasons people start smoking pot in the first place.

But let’s look at a historical example. I’m going to go back to the alcohol Prohibition. Once alcohol was banned, there was a boom in black market sales; people were consuming more alcohol than ever. True, once alcohol was made legal again, there was another boom, since the substance became widely available. But soon after this short-lived peak, the alcohol consumption significantly decreased.

Because of pot’s similarities to alcohol, I think it’s safe to assume pot will follow the same trends as did alcohol.

5. Everything in moderation (a counter argument).

Take a look at alcohol. And cigarettes. And T.V. And hamburgers. And fries. And, literally, just about everything. Everything is bad for you when done excessively. Water, for example, is a necessity. However, drinking too much water is also bad for you. When people talk about pot, they think, well, it should be illegal because if people do it a lot it’d be bad for them. Yes, that is true, but it’s also the same for every other thing in the world. Watching too much T.V. causes reduced brain activity. Eating too many hamburgers and fries causes obesity. Alcohol, in moderation, is good for your heart, but if you drink too much, *poof* liver damage.

It’s not fair to marginalize pot and say it’s “just different” from everything else. Keep in mind that pot isn’t something like coke or inhalants. One drag isn’t going to kill you.

Besides, as said before, the distribution of pot can be moderated.

—————–

So those are my top five reasons for legalizing pot, and remember, I have never smoked pot. Never.

And in response to the Georgia governor’s statement, I have to say I agree with NORML.

Do not fight fire with fire. Doing so will only further the governor’s argument. He says that pot turns people into unreasonable beasts intent and destroying everything (a little extreme, no?). And while his statement on the subject is unreasonable (to say the least), let’s not do anything to help him win. Let’s not do anything to help him prove his point.

Take the high road and show the world that you are better than him.

Depression and Creativity

Recent observations have led me to believe that there is an underlying link between Depression (and possibly other mental illnesses) and the creative process.

The link was first revealed to me in a rather obvious way, years ago. However, I failed to take proper notice of it at the time. I held an old copy of the New York Times in my hands, the editorial section lain out before my eyes. One editorial in particular caught my attention. It was written by a man who suffered and recovered from Depression. The strangest thing about the editorial was that the writer wished to regress back into Depression. At first, I was at loss for words. However, he went on to explain why he harbored such a wish. He, in his recovery, had apparently “lost” his previous ability to creatively write. Of course the ability still existed within himself, but he suddenly found it out of reach.

Now, take a look at past writers and artists. Mozart fell into tragedy. Vincent Van Gogh ended up severing his ear in a bout with mental illness. Countless writers and artists have fallen ill to tragedy and depression. Oftentimes, these creative minds are the cream of the elite, the substance which we are obliged to study in school. Up until now, I, like many other people, relegated these connections to coincidence. I told myself that it was simply coincidence that creative minds fell victim to depressive thoughts, or that they were related in some way to mental illnesses.

The connection now seems to prominent to ignore.

Many people will acknowledge a connection between Depression and creativity, however, they will argue that Depression “squashes” creative expression. This premise, I think we can safely discard by looking towards the great artists of human history.

I believe that depression can encourage creative thought. While this is not true for all people, I believe that it is a relatively significant factor. However, an even stronger premise would be that to remove or block depression from a person (in other words, to “heal” a person diagnosed with Depression) would be to remove the creative thought along with it.

Those with Depression can corroborate me when I say that this mental illness actually spawns creative thought. Depression allows for a different way in which to view the world, a way which those without Depression would lack. Contrasts deepen. Darkness is emphasized and the far off light is heightened. Compare the view of those with Depression with a black and white photo, and those without Depression with a color photo. Ultimately, there will be certain elements in the black and white photo unnoticed in the color photo. So, by removing Depression from the system, you remove the perception of the world.

In light of these thoughts, I began to glean for facts among superficial scientific knowledge of Depression and the brain. Simply, I looked into the psychiatry rather than the psychology.

I found this:

Depression is thought to be caused by a increased absorption of the hormone, serotonin. Serotonin usually acts, in the brain, to lighten the mood. However, once the hormone is absorbed by the serotonin receptors, the serotonin ceases to have effect on the body. Prozac, one of the most proliferated drugs used to treat Depression, works by somehow blocking off the serotonin receptors. Serotonin receptors, however, do not only deal with mood. They deal with cognition (the process of thought), perception, and mental imagery among other things.

These serotonin receptors are found in the  central and peripheral nervous system. So, you can find them in the central part of the brain, and along the spinal cord. These sections are known to fundamentally control behavior. Furthermore, these sections control informations processing, where senses influence behavior.

Because the science of Depression and serotonin is not an exact science, one must ask if the recovery from Depression can lead to side effects such as loss of creativity.

I am aware that many might say that the loss of creativity is a reasonable price to pull oneself out from Depression. However, I find it too much of a price. Fundamentally, I see Depression, not solely as an illness, but as a part of the body, of the psyche. To remove Depression would be to remove a part of ourselves. Thus, in “recovering” from Depression, we remove other parts of our processes and personality.

Our perception of what recovery is, I believe, must be altered. At the moment, we rely on drugs and therapy to simply block away the Depression, chaining the “monster” up and keeping it at bay, burying it deep down in our minds, always in fear that it will dig its way back up.

To recover we must not bury the “illness.” Rather, we should learn to live with the Depression, coexist with it. Thus, allowing us to tap from it when needed, whilst keeping it settled down, disallowing it to overcome us. An angry dog, for example, will attack when provoked or antagonized. But if we learn to coexist with the angry dog, the dog will not attack and we can actually make use of the dog.

In conclusion, I believe that we must learn to see Depression as a part of ourselves, and see it as an asset and as a friend.

Sarah Palin… Future President?

Sarah Palin resigned her title as Governor of Alaska… to become America’s next President.

I’m honestly not seeing that happening.

It makes perfect sense that, if Obama completely and utterly fails as a President, that a Republican will take office next term. But I don’t think it will be Palin.

What I’m trying to understand is the thinking behind not only Palin, but also her political advisors and any individual who believes that she will actually succeed. And, I’ve come to believe that while Palin has her share of faults, her political advisors seem to be exemplifying them. They are literally murdering Palin’s political career.  They are either geniuses and are trying to reduce Palin’s image to an attention-whore who no one will ever vote for Presidentially, or they are complete idiots and have no idea what they are doing.

You see, even if Palin was a decent leader, she would not succeed. Obama’s biggest flaw was that he had very little experience. Palin has less. Furthermore she decides to quite halfway through her term. Is that something we want in a leader? Why did her political advisors think this beneficial? She couldn’t even run for Vice-President… In fact, she was one of the reasons McCain lost the election. Many of America’s undecided voters voted Democratic because of Palin. She was Al Gore’s Ralph Nader.

If I were Palin, I’d try to redeem myself. If she could pull off a couple of highly successful terms, then her chances towards presidency would be much higher… Because then she would actually be successful. But then again, if I were Palin, I would’ve ditched that awful team of political advisors.

What scares me most is that America might pull another Bush election… and blindly elect an idiot to office, thus sending America to the pits of hell. At least Obama is intelligent. He might be having a rough start, and he might not be the greatest president of all time, but I’d take Obama over Palin any day. Just in the same way I’d take Obama over Bush. In fact, I think I’d take McCain over Palin too. I’d even consider taking Bush over Palin (I’d be more inclined to do so if Dick Cheney was gone… and if the rest of his cabinet was replaced with sensible people).

I’m sorry Sarah Palin, but even if you were a smart person, this decision to resign as Governor, in no way, a good one.

Of course, you’re not all that intelligent either.