The Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony and China

I just spent the last few hours watching the opening

ceremonies of the Olympics in Beijing. To say that the ceremonies were impressive is a massive understatement. I am awed-I don’t think I’ve ever watched anything on TV or anywhere else and just repeatedly said, “Oh cool,” or “No way,” or “Holy Cow”. Plus a few other unprintable, but complimentary, things. Of course, no city or country has ever spent as many resources, both cash and otherwise, on the ceremonies as the Chinese did. I read that the figure was something like USD$100 million. With that kind of cash, it’s no wonder that the ceremonies were spectacular.

But the fact that Beijing and China got the Olympics leaves me somewhat uneasy. I mean, something like 500,000 Chinese people are in prison for political crimes or dissension. A round-up of ‘undesirables’ happened in the last few weeks to get rid of some of the unattractive aspects of China’s society in Beijing. Pollution is a major problem because they seemingly have no emissions laws. And I have to wonder, how much of the ceremonies’ accoutrements were paid for through the use of slave, prison and child labor? Add generalized human rights abuses, plus the issue of Tibetan independence from China, and suddenly the lavish displays of the ceremonies seem to be a case of smoke and mirrors-sort of like hiding the dirty socks under the bed during an open house.

The Chinese nation comprises one quarter of humanity and their economic might can no longer be ignored--they’re a major player on the world stage. The fact that their influence worldwide will only grow makes it vital that the west and the east find some way to get along.

I wonder how long it will take the people of China to demand that their government act in a socially responsible manner. I’m not sure if it will ever happen. At least not in my lifetime.

But other things have happened during my lifetime, like the collapse of Communism in the Soviet Union, that I hadn’t expected either. The former Soviet Union and all of its former countries are still struggling to create identities and places for themselves in the world. From what I hear and read (and you can’t believe everything you hear and read), the former USSR is like the Wild West, a pretty well lawless land with sporadic attempts at lawfulness. I doubt if the former USSR will sort itself out for at least another hundred years.

But there’s a difference between the Americas (the US and Canada in particular) and the basically new independent states of the former USSR. Americans and Canadians (not including the aboriginal peoples) came here to start new lives and initiate new ways of thinking: being independent of thought and movement. People who came here wanted more than they could ever dream of in Europe in the 1600s--after all, if you weren’t in the upper classes, you were out of luck. So the people who originally came to America and Canada were more…motivated to succeed in a hostile environment than their brethren in Europe who stayed where they were. The immigrants who came here worked hard and the smart ones were financially successful, without having to have a title.

The peoples of the former USSR were basically peasants in a feudal system before communism came along. Do what you’re told and don’t argue. Keep your head down. And with communism it was just more of the same. Do as you’re told, don’t argue, don’t draw any attention to yourself. So, unlike Canada and the US, they have little experience in governing themselves and little experience in having to work hard to get ahead--because with feudalism and communism, there was no way to get ahead.

Europeans learned from their American and Canadian cousins and were able to gradually change their institutions to reflect and meet the needs of the general populace. Even exceeding the social policies in America and Canada. Once the French Revolution turned bloody and horrific, the royalty of other European countries realized that they would have to change or the same thing would happen to them.

So America, Canada and Western Europe were able to slowly morph into societies where individuality was not suppressed and where people were not forced into servitude to people who had more power and money.

The former USSR has not had the benefit of this slow morphing--they were dumped into a system of government they didn’t understand and they are still fighting their way through the morass.

Back to China. China loosened the strings on its economy, what, 10-15 years ago? They had the Iron Rice Bowl before that which they discontinued. I think the Chinese government knows that they can’t just dump their country into democracy without a long adjustment period. I hope.

I hope that as they become more familiar and more comfortable with the workings of a market-based economy, they will realize that trying to hold onto power, which is an astronomically expensive proposition, is not good economics. Imprisoning people is expensive. Keeping Tibet under their thumb is expensive. These things are not benefiting them. These things are like albatrosses around the economic and social neck of China.

I think and hope the Chinese government is performing a massive social engineering experiment to turn feudalistic peasants into independent, thinking, dynamic people. People who don’t rely on their overlord, emperor or government to tell them what to do, how to do it and why to do it. How to think.

And after watching those thousands of drummers beating their drums and performing their movements in synchronicity, I know that the Chinese are a freakishly (and I mean this in the most flattering way) organized people. They’re like the Germans of a new ancient world.

I want communism and human rights abuses to stop in China. I want Tibet to have freedom from oppression. And maybe, just maybe, they’re moving in that direction. Just really, reaaally slowly.

Confucius said, “It doesn’t matter how slowly you go, as long as you do not stop.”

I hope the progress doesn’t stop.

The Meaning of Love

Love. A four lettered word that can seemingly make life sweeter or cause your life to be an unmitigated hell. Weird thing for a romance writer to be saying, right?

As I love starting with definitions, Dictionary.com says love is:

1. a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person.

2. a feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend.

3. sexual passion or desire.

4. a person toward whom love is felt; beloved person; sweetheart.”.
   

That and about 17 other meanings for the word “Love”. But these definitions don’t seem to accurately describe the feeling of love.

We’ve all heard the lines:

Love makes the world go ‘round, and

Love’s a bitch.

The line between love and hate is thin.

It would seem that we’re very conflicted about love. And love seems to be different things to different people, so how do you know if your definition of love is compatible with your sweetie’s definition of love?

According the the New World Encyclopedia:

The romantic love of knights and damsels, called courtly love, emerged in the early medieval ages (eleventh century France), derived from Platonic, Aristotelian love, and the writings of the Roman poet, Ovid (and his ars amatoria). Such courtly love was often portrayed as not to be consummated, but as transcendentally motivated by a deep respect for the lady and earnestly pursued in chivalric deeds rather than through sexual relations. (The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Philosophy of Love). Well, chivalry sounds sort of nice but very frustrating for the individuals involved.

Romantic love distinguishes moments and situations within interpersonal relationships. Initially, the concept emphasized emotions (especially those of affection, intimacy, compassion, appreciation, and general "liking") rather than sexual pleasure. But, romantic love, in the abstract sense of the term, is traditionally referred to as involving a mix of emotional and sexual desire for another person.

And what about those cultures in which you don’t even meet your spouse until the marriage ceremony? Do these people learn to love each other? Tolerate each other? There doesn’t seem to be any data that suggests that arranged marriages are more prone to divorce than love-based marriages. Or is that a cultural thing as well? Are people in these cultures less likely to seek divorce/estrangement because it is not as accepted, as it is in the predominant cultures of America, Canada, Europe and Australia.

And then there are sub-cultures such as BDSM, D/s, DD and TiH relationships where, in some cases but not all, the participants insist that they love their partners despite the fact that there’s physical, emotional and mental pain involved.

I think love must go back to your childhood experiences. That’s where you first learned about love. Or hate. Or abuse. If you grew up in a basically loving environment where there was no physical, sexual, verbal, mental or emotional abuse, then you are probably likely to relate to other people (who you love) in a healthy manner. But if, like most people, you grew up in even a somewhat dysfunctional environment, then you might need to examine your desires and needs more closely. Know what you’re feeling and why you’re feeling it.

I guess it comes down to this: if the person in your life fulfills your needs and you fulfill their needs and you are happy with each other, then that’s love. If your needs or your partner’s needs are not being met and one or the other or both of you are not happy, then that’s just misery. And you both deserve something better.

But who am I to say? I just write romantic fiction. I’m still trying to figure out the reality of it.

The Meaning of Fear

Fear, as defined by Dictionary.com, is “a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined; the feeling or condition of being afraid”.

In small amounts, fear keeps us alive. Keeps us from being eaten by the tiger outside our ancestral caves, keeps us close to the fires that serve as protection from the wild animals. In large amounts, fear paralyzes.

In our everyday world, most people don’t have the problem of dangerous animals running up and down the grocery store isles. The most physical danger we face is from other people. Or as one writer put it, “The Most Dangerous Game”. Richard Connell wrote the story and from what I recall it involved one man hunting another man for sport. Most dangerous game indeed. A prey who can think and strategize and possibly defeat the predator.

In our day and age, we still face the most dangerous of predators--human beings. Whether the game takes place in Iaq, Afghanistan, the Middle East, Africa, South America--anywhere on the planet. Any city, town, village, hamlet, shoot.. even two people living two miles from each other in the middle of nowhere can be a danger to each other.

I believe, under the “right” circumstances, anyone can become a killer. If you are threatened by a thug, or someone who supposedly cares for you, with a knife or a gun suddenly everything is on the table.

I would not stand by and let someone kill me or attack me. As far as I am concerned, anyone who threatens me either verbally or physically is someone who needs to be dealt with. Verbal threats can escalate to physical threats. But being a reasonable human being, I have to decide if the person threatening me is a true threat to my health and/or life.

Like a lot of people, and probably women in particular, I have the “deer caught in the headlights” syndrome. Something threatens me, and I freeze. Unable to move, unable to react. Literally rooted to the ground. And I wonder if this has anything to do with lack of training. I mean, if you’ve never been attacked, how will you know what you will do?

I’ve heard that if you take self-defense courses and practice the moves, that in a real emergency you will automatically be able to defend yourself. Without any or little paralysis.

So, fear can motivate you to do good things for yourself, like taking a self-defense course, or losing weight and getting in shape, or not taking that shortcut through a dark alley at midnight. But fear can immobilize you and leave you vulnerable to emotional/verbal/physical attacks.

Examine your fears, ask if any of your fears can help you to do something positive. Are your fears justifiable or do you tend to exaggerate negative feelings? Through what lens do you view the world? If your lens is skewed, then get help to see things more realistically. For realistic fears, think about what you would do if threatened--think of all avenues open to you to deal with different threats. Go take that self-defense course. Do something to alleviate your fears. You need to have options. In any situation. Give yourself OPTIONS.

I think Winston Churchill said, “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.” And it’s true--arm yourself with knowledge and tactics to effectively manage your fears. I don’t think it’s possible to totally eliminate your fears but you can use them to your advantage.

Plant your Feet on the Cement Everyday

I think, like a number of writers, I tend to live in my head when I’m not in my favorite coffee shop studying people, their gestures and habits. And occasionally overhearing their conversations. (Honestly, I don’t do the last on purpose. Really.) And living in my head, for me, seems to consist of hiding out in my home. I justify this by saying, “I have to do some more networking/writing/plotting/come up with new story ideas/clean the office, kitchen, bathrooms’, whatever ad nauseam.

But someone I know brought up a very good point: I have to plant my feet outside my home on the cement sidewalk / grass lawn on a daily basis and let the world touch me. Let the world into my head so that I don’t rattle around in there all by myself.

Don’t get me wrong--I’m not a hermit. I speak to my family. I go out with friends regularly, I go to my writers meetings, I interact with people on a daily basis (even if it is the barista at Starbucks or the concierge in my building) and I take time to enjoy myself.

I recently started toting my camera with me whenever I go out. In the city, sometimes we have smog alerts and while this is a bad thing for people and the environment, it makes for great photographs with misty, moody shots. And it connects me to my community.

So even if one is on their own, one is not really alone unless one doesn’t make an effort to reach out. I am surrounded by people. I am involved with my community, my family, my friends and the people in the coffee shop (even if they don’t know it ;)).

So go out, plant your feet on the cement and meet yourself and your world.

What does "no" mean?

There isn’t a person on this planet, who at some point (or in my case, many points) hasn’t been told “No”. No, you can’t stay up late.No, you can’t have that toy. No, you are smart enough. No you’re not good enough. No, you’re not sexy enough. No, you are not worth IT.

And the surprising thing? Most of those “nos” are said to us by those people who claim to care for us. They claim they want to protect us from something. And they may be telling you the truth--at least as far as they are able to do so.

The word ‘no’ in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. No, you can’t jump off that building. No, you can’t kill another person. The laws of your country are generally for your protection if you live in a democracy. Laws make it possible to live together in society without the society dissolving into chaos and anarchy. If you don’t live in a democracy, that’s a whole other discussion.

As children growing up, hopefully our parents were at least cognizant of the fact that children need a certain amount of freedom, mixed in with a certain amount of control, in order to become full-fledged human beings. But people are not perfect, parenting is never perfect and things happen even with the best of intentions.

As adults, we need to recognize the reasoning behind the ‘no’ responses we receive. Is the authority figure (the one saying no) able to evaluate the situation logically and rationally? Does the authority figure have an agenda of which you are unaware? Does the authority figure have a self-esteem problem and says no to get a rush of self-worth because they can (or want to) control you? Is this figure a bully, either physically, mentally or emotionally? Is this person a threat to you in some way? Does this person just not care about you or is this person a stranger to you?

If you are a reasonable, sane person who is not a sociopath, it is more important to evaluate the ‘no’ in terms of what you are trying to accomplish. ‘No’ may mean I don’t agree with your reasoning and why don’t you try another tact.

For me, ‘no’ is an invitation to explore and evaluate my requirements, methods, needs, wants and desires. Just because someone tells me ‘no’ does not mean that I cannot move forward. It may mean having to side-step around an obstacle. Whether or not that obstacle means changing me is not important, as long as I know what the problem is. If I know what the problem is and I want to fix it, then I can fix it. Or if I’m not able to fix it, then I’ll find someone who can fix it.

Too many people give their power away to others without a fight. Without a thought. “Oh he said it so it must be true.” “I am really too stupid to know any better, so someone else should make the decision.”

Bottom line? Take responsibility for yourself. Trust yourself. Trust your instincts and intuitions. You may let yourself down, but at least you know to whom to attribute the success or failure of your venture.

“No”, in most cases, is an opinion, not a decree.

Do you ever wonder...

Do you ever wonder what your life would be like if you could just walk away from everything without consequences to the people who love or depend upon you? Just walk away from your job, your memories, your obligations, your family, your friends. Just leave. What kind of person would be created.

People identify themselves by what they do for a living. I am an engineer. I am a nurse. I am a doctor. I am a...writer. People identify themselves in relation to other people. I am a wife, a husband, a daughter, a son, a boss, a worker-bee.

I think that people want the security that comes with knowing their place in their lives, in other’s lives and in society. But what is left if you take all those things away? What is left of the person you think you are? Who are you?

What if you identified yourself by how you feel, by what or who you love, by what or who you hate? Is that an evolutionary step back? I suppose Darwin would say that survival of the fittest has governed the development of our social structures and ourselves. But what if you think that none of the structures seem to fit you? What if everything you have is taken from you in a huge upheaval, whether by forces emotional, physical or spiritual? Who are YOU? Not the facade we each present to the world, but what makes up the essence of you.

I can say that I love to play piano. I can say that I hate green beans. I can say that I love being drenched by a sudden splash of soft summer rain. I can say that I love cloud watching, watching the sparkling night sky, watching a lunar eclipse. I can say a lot about ME without referring to what I do for a living or the people who populate my life.

I think it’s important to know who you are before you can find your place in the rest of your life or in other’s lives.

Just a thought.

First Edit Done!

I finished the initial set of edits from my editor/publishing company! Yay! There might be more, but it's a learning process and I'm just glad I've jumped into the deep end to swim. I also received a copy of the cover art for the book and I LOVE IT! Wow.

Everything is going so well and I am so grateful about everything that's happening in my life. I can't say everything is perfect, I don't think perfect is possible or desirable, but things are moving in the right direction for the first time in a very long time. And I am determined that it will keep going that way!