Twitter launched a new way to see and navigate both followers and people you are following. Basically, there are two settings, expanded and list. The expanded setting is what’s new between the two. Also, new features were added to both pages.

 

As you can see from the image below, now you can see a quick update of what people in the list are saying (both Following and Follower pages look the same).

 

 

 

 

 

I found this extremely helpful because a lot of people don’t tweet as often so it’s hard to get to know the people who you follow. This way you can see what their last update was without having to go to their individual pages.

 

When it comes to Followers this feature proves most useful. Followers are people who sign up to see your posts, but you may not know what they are chatting about. If one of your followers is saying something interesting, you can reply or choose to follow them. It also helps a LOT that the new interface showing the Twitter’s profile was enhanced. 

 

 

 

Chatting and interacting with your followers is very important for people interested in promoting something, increasing the number of followers they have, having more fun with Twitter, or all of the above.  I know from personal experience that this was not all that easy to do unless you followed your followers.  

 

A very good example of this is what happened to me earlier today before writing this post. I went to check out my followers and saw that a friend of mine was listed. She began following me not too long ago. Her post was about people she's friends with don't post much on Twitter. Naturally, that caught my attention because some friends have told me to quiet the volume because I tweet so much. That prompted me to visit her Twitter page, and that’s how I learned that she hasn’t made any new posts since April. Even if I were following her, which I wasn’t at the time, I would have never known this. Now I have something to chat about with her.

 

Another interesting twist to these new pages is the tools available on each follower/followee window.

 

 

 

 

 

Back to my friend, from the Follower page I was able to send her a message. All it took was one click of the mouse.

 

Personally, I don’t use much the Twitter page much. Instead I rely on other applications. But at times I do go to Twitter to make some changes quicker. For example, I sometimes go there to delete a tweet that got posted by accident (such as a half-written one), or check out followers. I find it easier to do it that way. As you may imagine, I’m very happy with the new changes Twitter made to these pages.

Tags: twitter | followers | following | social media | marta donayre | apps | app

I installed TweetDeck at some point, and liked it. I liked a lot the Twitter functionality, but felt that the Facebook interface lacked a lot. Sadly (Or shall I say happily?) my TweetDeck stopped working after I tried to install Roxio’s Easy VHS to DVD. I tried installing and re-installing TweetDeck and its newest incarnations such as MashDeck. None of it worked. This forced me to look for a new desktop Twitter tool. This is when I ran into PeopleBrwsr.

 

So far, PeopleBrowsr is significantly better than TweetDeck. Here are the reasons I like it better:

 

1) PeopleBrwsr is Web-based, whereas TweetDeck needs to be downloaded into your computer.

 

I prefer Web-based solutions because they provide a lot of flexibility. First, I am able to log on from any computer. So if I’m traveling, say when I visit my mom abroad, there is no need for me to haul along a laptop. My mom’s computer or a cyber café will do the trick. The less luggage the better, right? This is why I developed both of my sites (martadonayre.com and granswiz.com) with Web-based technologies. The first site was built with Joomla (http://www.joomla.org/), and the second with TikiWiki (http://info.tikiwiki.org/tiki-index.php).

 

The second reason is that Web-based technologies encourage collaboration like no other solution does. Again, part of the allure is that people can log in from any computer that has Web access. Therefore, if a team of people is involved in the project, there is no need to worry about who has which files, and where are they located. The files are available to everyone who can log onto the collaboration site.

 

2) PeopleBrwsr Facebook’s functionality is awesome!

 

Whereas TweetDeck is the most popular Twitter solution, it makes it really hard to work with Facebook. According to Trenderr, Twitter posts are coming from Twitter, iPhone and Facebook in that order. Therefore, managing Facebook while managing Twitter is very important. This is especially true for people who are using social media and Web 3.0 technologies to promote a cause or organization.

 

Through PeopleBrwsr you can post a comment, “like” and “un-like” a post, and even “retweet” Facebook posts! It also allows you to view your friends’ posts in alphabetical order. This came in very handy today when I was looking for a specific post from a friend. Instead of scrolling through all the posts or having to go to the Facebook friend’s page, I clicked on the letter “A” and got all the posts from my friends whose first names start with “A.” I found the post I wanted really quickly that way.

 

I can also sort posts by how recently it they were posted, whether or not they have links, and in alphabetical order. Quite honestly, these are functionalities that Facebook itself does not offer.

 

3) PeopleBrwsr has the same capabilities of TweetDeck AND MORE!

 

If you like the tools available in TweetDeck, you’ll find them in PeopleBrwsr and then some. Through PeopleBrwsr you can also check out LinkedIn, FriendFeed, Plaxo, Digg, Photobucket, etc. So for people who are looking into using all the networks they possibly can, PeopleBrwsr delivers.

 

4) You can make multiple posts with one click.

 

The SEND feature is based on Twitter standards, 140 characters. On the other hand, users can select which applications to post the message to. A drop-down window allows you to check Twitter, Facebook, FriendFeed, Identi.ca, and Ping.fm. Since I am a power Twitter and Facebook user, I post only to those two sites.

 

5) #hashtags

 

PeopleBrwsr makes it easier to find the appropriate hashtag for a tweet. When you start your hashtag, it automatically recognizes it and suggests hastags for you. For example, earlier today I posted about youth getting shot in Detroit and wrote “#detroit” on my post. The moment I wrote that a drop-down menu opened and suggested a number of Detroit-related hashtags, such as #detroitlions, #detroitredwings, and #detroitjobs, among others. This feature helps a lot to demystify the very confusing world of hashtags.

 

As you can see, I’m really happy with PeopleBrwsr. As I type this, I have four panels open: my Twitter feeds panel, my Facebook panel, a panel that shows all the replies I get to my tweets, another for all the direct messages I get, and a third one running a constant search so that I can see who’s posting something I’m tracking. I really don’t use the other tools that much, and it appears that the LinkedIn feature is not as robust. I haven’t played much with this feature, so I can’t say much about what PeopleBrwsr can and cannot do regarding LinkedIn.

 

(I bet that I left out a lot of things that PeopleBrwsr can do, but I have not discovered yet. If I did this, please leave a comment.)

 

Having said all this, I do want to point out that this is a desktop feature, not a mobile phone feature… that I know of yet. Today I will be picking up my iPhone at the AT&T store, and will start a new search of appropriate software to do the social media work I do. Right now I am not 100% sold on TweetDeck for iPhone even though it was this solution that convinced me to upgrade from the LG Xenon to the iPhone. I am looking forward to this experimentation.

Tags: twitter | facebook | tweetdeck | peoplebrwsr | tweets | social media | web 3.0 | marta donayre

Suicide is a topic that’s dear to my heart since I spent an entire year in bed pondering what would be the most effective way to accomplish it. During that time I attended a service at my local Unitarian Universalist congregation, where suicide was the topic of the day. The reverend spoke continuously about how selfish it is to commit suicide. In yesterday’s New York Times I learned that UC Berkeley Professor Ronald Takaki took his own life. The sermon and the news have led me to believe that there are two different standards for people based on the reason they kill themselves.

 

In his sermon, the reverend spoke about the people who are left behind. This included the staff that had to find/recover/clean up after the body, as well as the families. He talked about how the railroad and Golden Gate Bridge workers had a hard time dealing with other people’s deaths. After all, they weren’t hired for that.

 

This sermon made me feel awful. I was already having a hard time dealing with my own feelings, which were further hindered by the potential pain I would cause my loved ones. Adding extra guilt to my journey did not help one bit.

 

On the other hand, in yesterday’s article about Takaki, his son is quoted as saying that Takaki struggled with multiple sclerosis for a number of years and finally gave up. The quote was compassionate. Even my wife said that she doesn’t blame him because MS is tough to live with.

 

At that moment I realized that there are two different standards for people who commit or think about committing suicide. Assisted suicide, for instance, is always talked about in terms of terminal illnesses. It is a solution for people in pain and for whom there is no hope.

 

Now if the pain is emotional or psychological, well, then you are a selfish wimp. There is ALWAYS hope for you. After all, your pain is not physical, and people cannot relate to it.

 

Personally, I have bipolar disorder. I have a number of friends who are in the mental health industry, and they have assured me that this is a problem that can only be treated with drugs.

 

It’s a chemical imbalance.

 

I try to define it as having a sort of diabetes of the brain. I am going to have to take medication for the rest of my life, or at least that’s how it feels to me as I type this right now.

 

I may or may not heal. Only time will tell.

 

Thanks (or no thanks) to the news and movies, people who are bipolar are often maligned.

 

We are allegedly a danger to society.

 

Mike Tyson’s woman beating history is always peppered by his “mania” ‘cuz he’s bipolar.

 

But in truth, we are only a danger to ourselves.  The greatest danger of bipolar disorder is suicide. People fear the “manic” monster, but the real killer is the depressive.

 

But according to the reverend, my pain is selfish.

 

You see, he understands a headache. He gets the joint ache. He may even get the generalized chronic fatigue pains.

 

But emotional pain? Nope. Most people don’t get that. And thus, most people make light of it.

 

As it happens, I also have friends who are consumers of mental health services. We talk openly about what we deal with in an informal support group of sorts.

 

With a specific friend, I’ll call her “Mary,” we joke about the topic of suicide. “Who are these people to guilt me into staying alive?!” We quip with each other as we laugh wholeheartedly.

 

But it’s true.

 

A lot of us can probably overcome our problems via medication.

 

The same could be true about people dealing with MS (or other life-threatening diseases) on a daily basis who don’t kill themselves.

 

And the truth is that not all of us have the strength to deal with the pains caused by life.

 

Pain tolerance, be it physical or emotional, is not universal or uniform in effect.

 

So I beg of you, please don’t judge those who seek to end pain by ending life at their own hands. Yes, assume it may be an act of desperation or lack of options, but if you think about it… hell! It’s our lives, our bodies, and our destinies. No one else should judge those who make a personal decision of this magnitude.

 

We are more than eager to receive help if we are ready for it, but it’s no one’s judgment to make but our own.

Tags:

La Corte Superior de California decidió ayer a favor de la propuesta 8, y al mismo tiempo mantuvo la validez de mi matrimonio. Ayer fue un día agridulce, pero en realidad lo agrio reino.

 

Anoche caminamos con cientos más desde la Plaza César Chávez hasta la alcaldía de San José para hacerle saber al mundo nuestro disgusto de que la corte eliminón un derecho que ella  misma nos otorgó el año pasado.

 

Mucha gente no sabe que en los Estados Unidos la palabra matrimonio, marriage, es un término legal. El matrimonio otorga protecciones, derechos y responsabilidades a nivel estatal y federal. O sea, es válido en el país entero. Sociedades domésticas, o domestic partnerships, no cargan el mismo peso.

 

El matrimonio también significa el ser iguales perante la ley, la mayor promesa de este país. Muchos venimos a los E.E.U.U. a conseguir el sueño americano de auto suficiencia. Pero este sueño es imposible si se nos niega la igualdad perante la ley. Como inmigrante entiendo perfectamente como esa desigualdad me afecta. El hecho de que además soy lesbiana aumenta mi dispariad.

 

Por suerte mi matrimonio continua siendo valido. Lo triste es que a millares de personas se les ha negado esta oportunidad. Y lo peor es como esto se dio.

 

Al reconocer el voto popular, la corte creo un precedente donde una simple mayoría puede alterar la constituición para afectar a una minoría. Consecuentemente la constituición no significa nada y los derechos de minorias están sujetos a los gustos y disgustos de la mayoría. Y no estamos hablando de una mayoría substancial. La Prop. 8 pasó con una diferencia muy pequeña.

 

Esa es la nota agria que la corte nos regaló a todos, no solo a los gays. La corte nos dijo que si somos minorías nuestros derechos no valen nada si el 50 porciento más un voto asi lo decide. Yo aún me acuerdo de la propuesta 187, y me pregunto que habría pasado si hubiese sido esta propuesta en juego, y no la Prop. 8.

 

La constituicion de un territorio es el equivalente a la Biblia de una conregación. Cambios a este documento legal sagrado no pueden ser hechos a la ligera. La gran promesa de la constituición es que esta proteje a las minorías de la tirania de la mayoría. La democracia no puede funcionar si las minorias no gozan de esta protección. Hoy me toco a mi por ser lesbiana. Solo Dios sabe a quien le tocara mañana.

Tags:

Today the California Supreme Court decided that Proposition 8 - banning marriage equality in the state - is valid, but that the marriages that were performed when marriage was still valid are still legal in California. Leslie and I got married a few days before the election, therefore our marriage is legal in California. But if my friends who aren’t married decide they want to, they can’t. It feels a lot like the day REAL ID passed.

 

REAL ID is probably the most draconian immigration law passed by Congress after the Chinese Exclusion Act. Among other things, the law requires that states comply with a federal standard for the identification documents they use. In order to obtain such documents, applicants have to provide a burdensome amount of documents that, in theory, would make it impossible for undocumented immigrants to obtain them. And like all bills trying to curtail immigrant participation in society, it hurts mostly Americans, especially lower income Americans.

 

When REAL ID passed, I was devastated. Technically, it didn’t affect me because I was in legal standing, but through my immigration work I learned how easily it is to become undocumented. It can happen for something as simple as a clerical error on the immigration offices side, but it really doesn’t matter. This error makes you an unwanted and law breaking illleeeeeeggaaaaaalllll.

 

Surprisingly, REAL ID included a goodie that helped, well, me. REAL ID eliminated the cap of green cards allotted to asylees living in the U.S., and at the time I was one of them. This also coincided with the favorable end of a lawsuit brought against the federal government by asylum/refugee advocates. I received my green card application a few weeks after that, and the green card proper in a record time.

 

When I applied for asylum my lawyer told me that it would take about 5 years for me to get the green card, but I had to wait two years before I applied. Altogether, it would be anywhere between 5-7 years. When I applied for residency I received a letter from the then INS telling me that it would take between 10-12 years to get it. My forehead still hurts from the smack I gave it. But thanks to REAL ID I got my green forms within a couple of years after I filed for it. Altogether, it took me less than 4 years to get the coveted residency.

 

And that was not the only goodie! Since a vast number of asylees had been waiting for a many years to get their green cards, people like me had a year reduced from their wait time prior to applying for citizenship. I received my green card in February 2006, but the date on it is February 2005. Thanks to this freebie, I will be applying for citizenship next year, rather than 2011. If I’m lucky, I will be able to vote in the 2010 elections!

 

As happy as I was, I could not wrap my mind around what happened. I benefited personally from one of the most heinous pieces of legislation enacted into law. Legislation I rabidly advocated against. How could I benefit from something that hurt so many people?

 

Among immigrant rights circles I felt odd. Everyone was in mourning, and I simply could not be joyous for what happened to me. Well, it was odd. Leslie and I were delighted, but at the same time we were extremely sad. It is really hard to explain survivor’s guilt. Which, I might add, happened too when I was granted asylum in the most sui generis case.

 

As you may imagine, I feel in a similar way right now. My marriage to Leslie is legal simply because of a matter of timing. If my friend Rachel decides to marry her girlfriend, well, tough titties. They can’t. At least not right now. And that sucks.

 

I am a very compassionate person. Most people confuse compassion with charity or pity. Compassion is not that. The word derives from Latin, and it means “with passion,” in the sense that your joy is my joy, your sorrow is my sorrow. So at a moment like this, I think and wonder about my friends who aren’t married and may like to be, and how shitty it feels to be left out. And here is where survivor’s guilt comes in. I should be happy for myself, and even celebrate. Heck! The court ruled MY way. But I simply can’t. And it really feels awful.

 

We all want to be special. We all want to be gifted. But at times the gift feels odd. How DO you deal with being the blessed immigrant who is granted something that others are so wrongly denied? How DO you deal with being the blessed lesbian who is granted something that others are so wrongly denied?

 

I have no idea how to do it. I didn’t learn that when I got my green card. It still weighs on me that I benefited from the suffering of so many.

 

I have no idea how I will deal with this now. “Taking it one day at a time” is a very wise American saying. I guess I’ll do that, and protest in all force tonight. I’ll be protesting for all my friends who didn’t or couldn’t marry when the window was open, and who are now denied that basic right. That basic fairness that is supposed to come with the lofty ideal of “equality under the law.”

Tags:

I came to the U.S. 14 years ago. Part of my culture shock included the place that the military have in American consciousness, and Memorial Day always gives me reason to pause and think.

 

My first thoughts are always drawn to the evils of the military. Sorry, I can’t help it. My history includes brutal dictatorships, and all of Latin America is scarred by them. All of them were not just supported, but also put in place by the U.S. The torture techniques they used on us were learned at the School of the Americas, a U.S. military institution.

 

Then I realize that soldiers on the ground are not responsible for the actions of the American government. And as much as atrocities have been committed by the troops, these atrocities were not done in a vacuum.

 

I know this guy who I’m going to call “Jack.” He was special ops in Vietnam. We were talking about his experience one day, and he said that he did awful things in Vietnam when he thought he was doing something good. Only after he returned to the U.S. did he realize what he had done, and felt incredibly sorry for all the pain he caused to countless innocent people.

 

Jack’s story always makes me reflect about the troops. On one hand, should we observe Memorial Day as the day in which some were duped into doing awful things in the name of patriotism? On the other, should we praise those who put their lives at risk for a cause that’s greater than them even though they are misled/misguided?

 

World War II helps me bring this into perspective. What the coalition troops achieved by ridding the world of Hitler was simply amazing. And many good people died, on both sides, believing that their cause was the right one. This is something worth celebrating: that people are willing to put their lives at risk for a cause they believe in.

 

Memorial Day is not an easy day. We cannot simply remember and mourn those who fought our wars and not wonder about the military industrial complex in the U.S. The current war in Iraq is appropriate to mention at this point because it was in large part brought about by greed. As a result, countless people in Iraq as well as U.S. troops died or are severely injured. How can we glorify the death of a soldier who died for the greed of these people? We should resent that death.

 

Memorial Day is a way of glorifying the military. It feels to me that if someone questions anything regarding this issue, one is deemed anti-American. Thus, being anti-military is being anti-American.

 

For me this is simply bizarre because I come from a culture where the military is seen as less than great, and a necessary evil. Back home – and I’m using the term “home” very broadly to include most of the places I’ve lived in – military service is mandatory for a certain number of years. Most people avoid it like the plague, and only those who can’t find a doctor friend to sign a document saying that one is unfit have to go to it. This is a subtle way of saying that it is always the disenfranchised who end up in the military.

 

Isn’t that interesting? The U.S. military is a volunteer force that usually attracts the disenfranchised as well. People with few options are drawn there because of the opportunities it offers.

 

As I write this, I realize that the common denominator is that poor people, usually with darker skin, are more likely to end in the military. The military provides them with discipline, a chance to educate themselves and become someone greater than they would have on their own.

 

But the military also sends them to war, and governments use them like puppets when need be. Usually this is done for political gain. Tragically, this causes pain, sorrow and death for the troops and for those they attack. Therefore, I find it very sad to glorify military service the way it’s done in the U.S. on Memorial Day.

 

Which brings me back to Jack.

 

He told me that one day someone asked him how was it in Vietnam for him, and his first gut answer was “I enjoyed it very much!” He was not expecting to hear himself say that. Saying that caused him to pause and reflect for a second on what slipped from his lips. Jack then realized that he did do a lot of good in Vietnam. He told me how he helped people and how that was very much fun at times.

 

“The moment I realized how much fun I had in Vietnam doing these things,” said Jack, “was the moment the nightmares ended, the fears ended, and all that stuff ended.”

 

Jack’s story always resonates with me on Memorial Day. I strongly believe that the military – everywhere not just the U.S. – is something that we should consider getting rid of. We are on the 21^st Century, and you would assume that by now humanity would have found a better way to deal with conflict. This is especially poignant when the military proper is fueled by, well, the military industrial complex. It is hard for me to see the military without questioning the financial motivations behind it.

 

But the military also does good things. I believe Jack when he tells me that he both committed atrocities and did good. it reminded me of the time when the drivers’ union in Ecuador stopped the country because they wouldn’t drive the buses. People couldn’t get to work, and the military took over the transit system. Instead of buses, workers were being transported in military trucks. It was not an ideal solution, but it helped people go to work and continue to earn an income in a time of crisis.

 

Memorial Day is not a day of empty patriotic rhetoric. It’s more a day of reckoning. We should question the role of the military, both good and bad. I don’t believe that all who died in armed conflict were heroes. Some may have been great idiots during their lives who caused a lot of harm and maybe the world is better without them. Just because they died in a battle field shouldn’t automatically make a person a hero. Yet there are always those who are true heroes. Those who heal the wounded, help build schools, bring stability to unstable areas, and those who simply help you get to work on time.  Indeed, Memorial Day is not about answers. It’s about questions. Hopefully I will keep on asking myself these questions for the next 14 years.

Tags:

Recently Yasmin Nair wrote a provocative blog on the Uniting American families Act, which is stalled in both chambers of Congress. You can read it here.

 

I wrote a comment on her blog disagreeing with her whole heartedly. I strongly believe that Nair’s comments can be off the top like in the case of the piece mentioned above, but I also see her as a lighting rod that makes us question our presumptions and take a broader view of issues. For example, thanks to Nair and others like her, I now understand better what the term “heteronormative” is and how wrong it is. If you read Nair, you will know that this is one of her favorite words.At times I wonder if she invented it.

 

Her newest piece on Bilerico is about the hate speech she was a victim of due to that piece. Nothing could have hurt me more than reading this. And I fully understand her.

 

I too have been in the receiving end of hate of LGBTQ people who refuse to admit that UAFA is not the be-all and end-all of LGBTQ immigration. Quite honestly, UAFA is NOT an immigrant rights bill. It is a civil rights bill that only helps American citizens and permanent residents. It does not consider the immigrant per-se like, say, the DREAM Act does. By and large, in the LGBTQ community an immigrant only counts if he or she is the appendix of a citizen or resident whose rights and benefits are being denied. Other than that, thank you very much, but we don’t need you. And yes, I too have heard beautiful things coming out of the mouths of LGBTQ people who disagreed with me. And so have people who work hard to help LGBTQ asylum seekers. They have been accused of not working hard enough on UAFA, and focus only on those worthless asylees-to-be.

 

Nair hits it on the head when she says:

 

“I do believe that people should be allowed to sponsor visitors/partners/lovers/friends into this country without the state poking and prying and examining their lives and emotions and without drawing arbitrary distinctions between acceptable and unacceptable immigrants. But UAFA, as it stands now, only replicates the worn-out gender paradigms and potentially exploitative regimes of power that the state already imposes on us (it has nothing to say about friends, but only "committed partners.") Can we, should we contest that? I'm willing to have a conversation on how to make that happen. The question is: can the vitriol from the loudest and angriest UAFA supporters allows us to have a conversation?”

 

My beef with Nair on this one is that in spite of all its shortcomings, I see UAFA as an essential piece of legislation. I also don’t think it’s the job of this one piece of legislation to challenge the social paradigm in which we live. No community, be it the LGBTQ, immigrant, labor, people of color, etc. should bear the burden of fixing the world. At times, Nair comes through as implying just that, that the LGBTQ community should change the world. Anything the community does to imitate the oppressive heteronormative status quo is just plain wrong. Or at least that’s how I interpret her.

 

Now, if you’ve read this far, you will realize that I was able to have some form of back and forth with Nair based on her arguments. No need to name calling here.

 

When Nair says that “UAFA supporters are vicious, angry, xenophobic, and hysterical people” she's right! Many fall into the trap of the good immigrant v. bad immigrant and resort to name calling, in this case of Nair. Um… the good immigrant being their partners, the bad immigrant is the one not in a relationship… at least not with a porr and sorry disenfranchised American.

 

As an oppressed community we want others to open their heart and accept us, yet we ourselves are so quick at closing ourselves to others. How can this be? How can any LGBTQ person have the audacity of saying – like I’ve heard many times – that certain groups of people (Blacks) should accept them because that group knows discrimination well, and then turn around and discriminate? What happened to Nair is nothing more than plain old bigotry, and we should ask ourselves what is it that creates such a reaction. I don’t know about you, but I learned in philosophy class that the moment a person resorts to name-calling during a discussion is the moment the person admits that he or she has lost the argument. If UAFA supporters really want to make a strong case for their side, they are saying loudly that they don’t have one. At least not when it comes to debating the merits, or lack thereof, of the bill with Ms. Nair.

 

Voices like Nair’s, as irritating as they may be to some – as shown by the response to her blog – are the most precious ones in the fight towards social change for all. Even for those who, like me, disagree with her. Don’t like what she writes? Then ignore her, but don’t insult her. Doing so says more about you than about her.

Tags:

I admit it! I have not seen the movie. Yet the one thing I have been following is the news about the various tragedies following the cast of the movie. Their sad stories, made public due to the film’s popularity, may help people like them: India’s poor.

 

In 1981 the movie Pixote, a Lei do Mais Fraco was released in Brazil. The movie shared a lot of characteristics with Slumdog. The first one is that filmmakers cast children living in the squalid conditions depicted in the film. The second is that the film was a huge success at the time. Third, the children in the film went back to their impoverished lives not reaping a fraction of the benefits the filmmakers did. And finally, I didn’t see either film.

 

Back in 1981 we had no internet. I only found out about the tragic death of the movie’s star Fernando Ramos da Silva many years later. I was very young in 1981, too young to see such a violent film even though it reflected the real lives of children my age. At that tender age, I already knew that being in a movie that successful brought fame and fortune to those who were in it. In our society fame and fortune are usually associated with happiness, so I assumed the movie stars were happy. You can imagine my heartbreak when I found many years later that the kids in the movie had returned to their slums and that Ramos da Silva had been killed in a police shootout.

 

But today we have the internet. After Slumdog won the Oscar, news about the sale of Rubina Ali, one of the stars of the movie, was rampant on the Internet. The news shed light onto the potential negligence of the filmmakers towards the children, which also happened with Pixote. It also pointed out to the world that these kids indeed live very meager lives, something that didn’t happen with Pixote because after the movie was over, so was his story.  Ali’s story moved the world so much that filmmakers took it upon themselves to right the wrong they made, and provide this child with better opportunities to avoid her being sold.

 

Now news has come that another Slumdog star, Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail, is facing the harsh realities of being poor in India. His entire family was evicted from their shack in the dark of night because they were allegedly squatting on government property. And before ordered out, Ismail was hit with a bamboo stick by the police. The family is now also homeless. Like in Ali’s case, it appears that this particular family will receive some form of assistance. The government seems to be accommodating the starring children in better housing.

 

These stories are a daily occurrence for millions of children not just in India, but around the world. They suffer in silence. They die hungry and/or of preventable diseases, yet we never hear of them. Fortunately, we are now hearing the stories of these children and public pressure seems to be working. According to an article from the BBC, the filmmakers “recently announced that they will donate £500,000 to a charity which will help children living in the slums of Mumbai.” This will benefit many children in Mumbai, not just the actors of the movie. And I strongly believe that this would have never happened had their stories remained hidden from the public eye as it happened with the cast of Pixote.

 

The more the world changes, the more it stays the same. Poverty, greed, injustice, discrimination and hatred are as alive and well as they always were. On the other hand, we now have better tools to make this world a better place. I strongly believe the internet to be one of such tools. Originally, Slumdog filmmakers paid the stars $2,000 and made no attempts to change their lives beyond that. The pressure created by the stories of the children served as a catalyst for the donation that will enable the education of many other children in Mumbai. Hopefully all children, not just in Mumbai, but in all of India will benefit from the attention this particular movie cast on their lives. All of our lives were touched by the movie, even if we didn’t see it. This is why the suffering of Ali and Ismail touched us so. And it is this aspect of communication that enables change.

Tags:

Tags:

You a local artist??? Check this out:

Students of Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business MBA program are seeking proposals for an original outdoor art piece as a memorial to three students who passed away last year. Selected artist will work with a Memorial Committee, which is comprised of MBA students, to create a memorial to be placed in Schwab Residential Center, an on-campus residential complex for MBA students. To view the RFP and submit a proposal, please visit http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/memorialrfp/memorialrfp.pdf.
Contact: Betty Chen |  4157224820 |  www.gsb.stanford.edu/memorialrfp/memorialrfp.pdf |  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Tags:

I was drawn to the constellations found in the image of the Virgen de Guadalupe, and discovered that only three were completely depicted within the same region. That is, the constellations did not cover two different areas of the image, but each was contained within a region. One of them is the constellation Ursa Major, found on the Virgen’s mantle. I wondered why this particular constellation would be so fully depicted since it has no real meaning in astrology. Western astrology that is. But when I looked at Eastern astrological references a new meaning appeared.

My definition of the Virgen de Guadalupe is never contained within one faith. She escapes limited human comprehension and embodies a larger image of the Divine Feminine. I believe that this is why peoples of many faiths, not just Catholics and Christians, embrace her as their Savior. Therefore, finding Eastern meaning in this Western image was so important to me.

In a previous article, I discussed the symbolism of the constellation of Leo in the Virgen’s dress. Being associated with male attributes, Leo speaks volumes when we take into consideration his location in the image. This is particularly true when we take into account Ursa Major.

The constellation of Ursa Major, or the Big Dipper, has a rich meaning in Eastern religions. Taoist Buddhism includes the Great Bear Sütra, or Pei-tou ching. It is associated with the Sun and the Goddess Mirichi. The constellation itself is the chariot that Mirichi rides in the night sky to bring us dawn. Thus, it is a female deity, a manifestation of the Divine Feminine, who illuminates the world. This constellation is also associated with the Goddess Tara, and her many manifestations, but mostly with Tara’s unending compassion.

I found these concepts fascinating because the constellation is located over the blue-green mantle of the Virgen’s image. Generally speaking, in Western culture blue colors are associated with the male, whereas pink and light red colors with the female. We see, then, that the image is presenting us with a truly Feminine symbol over a truly Masculine symbol, merging them into one.

If we put together the Eastern meaning of the constellation with it’s location on the Virgen’s mantle we can see that we are being told a story.

I honestly believe that the image of the Virgen represents a keyhole to a new level in human evolution, and that every aspect of it serves to convey that message. In this particular case, it means that the source of illumination is the Divine Feminine embodied in the Divine Masculine. That is, that which is Masculine needs to merge with that which is Feminine in order to provide the illumination we seek.

If we step back a little, we will see that the mantle covers the Virgen. The mantle is blue and the dress of the Virgen is pinkish. This is a clear message that the male aspect needs to protect the female aspect. Yet this male aspect needs to be balanced with the feminine! It can’t be pure masculine energy. And as I explained in the Leo piece  the “feminine” that’s protected also needs to be balanced with the masculine. It can’t be only feminine energy either.

Looking at the mantle and Ursa Major more closely, we will notice that there are NO two things. That is, there is no mantle separate from the constellation, and no constellation separated from the mantle. It’s all one thing. Unlike, say, the mantle and the dress. These are two very distinct pieces of attire as well as regions in the image.

This can only mean that the balance has to be within one self. Like in the case of Leo, the image is reiterating the message that we all need to work towards balancing our male and female energies within us, not without. Sadly, the balancing of energies in many spiritual traditions is understood as the coming together or men and women through the sexual act. This is not the case. Men and women coming together is merely a symbolism of the energies. It’s not a necessity or a manifestation of such, only a symbol. Else all men would be the same, all women would be the same, and the third gender wouldn’t exist.

The key to opening the new evolutionary phase which the Virgen’s image professes is hidden in the messages of her garb. She is using her outer self to force us to look into our inner selves. It is this introspection and this understanding of who we should allow ourselves to be that will enable us to reach the dimension represented by the Sun behind her. She is asking us to fully embrace both our femaleness and our maleness and to become fully human, and identify as such. She is asking us to transcend the narrow definitions of male and female both energetically as a source of personal identification.

Tags:

Today I met a man.

 

He was an average looking man…

 

If it weren’t because of the large bottle of beer in his hand and the caked blood on his check.

 

I walked by him, trying to avoid him, trying to smile at him.

 

A long time ago I learned that one of the hardest pains of homeless people was the denial of their humanity. People on the street pretend they don’t exist.

 

Therefore, I tried to see if he was looking at me. If he was, I would smile at him. If he wasn’t, I wouldn’t intrude in his space. Neither happened.

 

Instead he stopped.

 

He stopped almost right next to me and began to talk. He was talking to the empty space in front of him. I knew he was talking to me.

 

You see, he too didn’t know whether I was looking at him or not. He too was trying to figure out whether to connect or to avoid intruding into my space.

 

“I’m so ashamed of myself,” he said.

 

“I’m shaking,” he said as he extended his hand.

 

“I haven’t shaved in a few days.”

“I smell.”

 

I stopped.

 

I was on my way to my car. Had I kept on walking I would be away from it all, in the cold comfort middle-class provides. Instead, I stopped.

 

I listened.

 

I stepped closer.

 

“I’m sorry to hear,” I said.

 

“I slept on the bushes last night,” he said. “And someone threw a blanket on me.”

 

“I need help. I was going to this center, but they kicked me out,” he said.

 

I listened.

 

“They told me I should come back tomorrow and talk to the director to see if they will take me back in,” he said.

 

“Do whatever you need to do today to hang in there and go to see the director tomorrow,” I said.

 

And then I knew I wasn’t helping.

 

I told him how a few years ago, two or three… maybe four or five. I can’t quite remember. A few years ago I was suicidal. I quit my job and spent a year in bed trying to heal from only-god-knows-what.

 

One day I was alone in the house. I felt awful and ran to the kitchen. Grabbed a knife with my right hand, and extended my left wrist in front of it. Just as violently as I rant to the kitchen and picked up the knife; I put it down. I knew I wanted to kill myself, but this time I made a promise. The promise was that before I actually did hurt myself… you see that was my plan after all… I would seek help.

 

I would seek help.

 

“I know I need help,” he said.

 

That reminded me of that story of mine.

 

So I told him my story.

 

Knowing you need help means that the battle is at least half won. It took me so long to acknowledge I needed help. So long to admit it to myself. So long to do something about it.

 

I told him my story.

 

He looked at me as tears ran through his cheeks. Not because of me. He was crying before I told him. He understood.

 

Most importantly, I understood.

 

I understood that I was not far from becoming him. I understood that I could have turned into the person with a bottle or cheap beer on one hand, a bandage on the other, and caked blood on my cheek.

 

I could have been that person, crying on the street ashamed of what I had become.

 

It could have been me.

 

I helped however I could, and moved on. I left him where I found him, with a few more bucks in his pocket, and the address of where he could find help.

 

I moved on and I remembered my own story.

 

All I can do is show him where there is water, but I can’t force him to drink it. Just like so many pointed the route to salvation to me at some point. I only walked it when I was ready to walk on that thorny road.

 

I helped him however I could, and moved on.

 

I moved on.

 

I hope that so did he.

Tags:

I finally finished my series of 12 paintings based on the Virgen de Guadalupe. I created a mini series of 3 paintings, one of them depicting the constellation of Leo.

 

Leo is given many attributes that are deemed male in our society. The lion, after all, is the King of the Animal Kingdom, not the queen. Bravery and extroversion are linked to this sign. Men are admired for having these traits. Women, on the other hand, become opinionated bitches if they exhibit them. On the downside, Leo can be patronizing, bossy, and pompous. These characteristics are usually associated to successful men. Think Donald Trump.

 

The constellation is located over the abdomen of the Virgen de Guadalupe. Some observers, especially Christian ones, argue that this stands for Jesus Christ. They argue that the Virgen is pregnant with the sheep who will return as a lion. That is all good and well, but I don’t quite see it that way.

 

The constellation is located on the dress of the Virgen, which is pinkish. Pink, salmon, red pastels and the like are usually associated with the feminine. In addition, it is indeed located over her womb, also a very feminine area. Men don’t have wombs. It’s important to keep in mind that the Virgen is imbued with Western symbolism just as she is imbued with Aztec symbolism. Because of this, the colors on her clothing are important.

 

If the Virgen’s cloak were a color other than blue, maybe the fact that Leo is located on pink fabric would be less important. The blue-male cloak protects and at the same time hides the pink dress. The male shelters the female because that which the male shelters is VERY important. But Leo is not on the blue cloak.

 

Understanding this subtlety is important because it reveals yet another dimension of the messages brought by the image. There is no doubt that the Virgen de Guadalupe represents a keyhole to a new dimension, the golden halo behind her. In order to access the new dimension one needs to fully enter the female. This is not a sexual reference, but a surrendering message. Just like one surrenders to sleep in order to awaken renewed, one needs to surrender to the feminine energy inherent in all of us to be reborn into our more evolves selves. 

 

Sadly, the world in which we live is dominated by male energies. Every thing from our TV shows, our societal priorities, and even the way in which our work environments are organized are inherently male in nature.

 

Therefore, by placing this extremely male symbol, Leo, the image talks about the need to subdue the male in order to achieve the energetic balance needed to grow. This balance is not external. It does not mean that men and women should do this or that to balance the energies. In his book “Slavic sorcery: shamanic journey of initiation,” Kenneth Johnson writes that when the Soviet Union was formed both men and women were assigned their tasks. As a result, many women began doing jobs typically associated with men, such as farm or construction work. He argued that one of the first things women did after the collapse of the Soviet Union was to return to the home to balance the energies. This is an example of external balancing of energies. It only leads to gender roles, but not true energy balance.

 

The balance that the image of the Virgen refers to is internal balance. Both men and women have both male and female energies within us. These are the energies that are unbalanced. And this imbalance is what forces men and women to conform to gender roles rather than to pursue their true passions. This imbalance binds our wrists and condemn us to a less-than-ideal life. This imbalance brings upon degradation of the individual and the planet.

 

The image of the Virgen de Guadalupe is telling us that bringing the male (Leo) into its female lake will help all of us to achieve the balance we need.  

Tags:

This is a response to Yasmin Nair's pieceThe Kids Aren't Alright : The Gay Marriage Movement and its Manipulation of Children and Youth on the Bilerico Project. 

Dear Yasmin,

Not sure I agree with you on this one. Personally, I am not in favor or against marriage equality. I believe that we are all equal, thus we all deserve justice. Therefore, I believe in both individual rights and family rights. And I also believe that one should not trump the other. Having said that, I also don't have a solution for it... at least not yet. :)

On a more practical level, you know I am all for immigration benefits for same-sex couples. I prefer the passage of legislation like the Uniting American Families Act (mostly ignored by the LGBT powers that be) rather than marriage. The legislation is federal and if it were to pass, we would have these benefits now. The marriage movement is following a state-by-state strategy... so you can imagine how long it will take for these benefits to come to fruition. In the meanwhile, loving people are being separated. BUT since marriage is a tool, and I'm all for using any tool available so I support it with some reservations.

That's my stand on the whole marriage thing... not sure I ever quite explained myself to you on this matter. :)

My points on your piece are:
1) Ad nauseum posters have argued here that kids are willing to be a part of it. My experience here in California, where prop. 8 was fought, is that kids were the most exuberant participants at marches and rallies. Also, I heard one too many anecdotes of children coming home after the passage of prop 8 terrified that they were going to be taken away from their families. The damage was not done by our side, but by the Yes on Prop 8 people. Those TV ads were awful, and kids saw them on TV too, you know. Had our side been more proactive on the kid issue, well, maybe our kids would have heard a different story and wouldn't have freaked out as much.

2) Whether we like it or not, marriage is about sex. Under Bush the abstinence-only routine was emphasized exactly because of that. When I was growing up in Ecuador, I learned that the ID cards of adults stated their marital status. If they were caught in an... shall we say... intimate situation with someone else who was not their spouse, they could be arrested. This line of thought is particularly true in the largest monotheistic traditions (Islam, Judaism, and Christianity) and their sexual hang-ups.

Therefore, there IS a psychological element to marriage that addresses the issue of sexual relations. The ability to marry normalizes us... not in the sense that we become heteronormative, but in the way where we cease to be aberrant. Now, the kid in school may still be beaten up for being different just like nooses are sadly still being hung in school yards (Jena 6). But at the same time, the hate crime will be the aberrant one in the eyes of society, not the victim. At least that is how I see it. And let me reiterate, my position is from a psychological perspective.

To illustrate it better, let me tell you a little story. A couple I know of got married in SF in 2004 when Newsom took the law into his hands. One of the women was kinda disowned by the family. The whole "we love you but refuse to acknowledge your partner" thing. Her father is a Knight of Columbus. After they got married in SF, her FATHER acknowledged the relationship and embraced the partner as his daughter. We cannot underestimate the psychological effect the word "marriage" has on society, even if it has none in our own personal lives.(which is my case, and I believe yours).

Now, that's about marriage between two people. From a more complex family angle.... well.... one of my dearest friends is in what I call a love polygon (triangle doesn't quite cut it). He and his wife have a very complex family relationship with his girlfriend and her wife, and his wife's boyfriend. And it works really well for them, and I am happy for him.

In talking about different family arrangements, he told me how the gays don't even want to touch their movement. I understand why... even though I think it's silly. Gays are doing what any oppressed group does. That is, they are aligning themselves with the oppressor as much as they can. The oppressor, being white, heterosexual, a citizen and male... and preferably rich... well... choose an aspect of him and align yourself with it.

My experience in immigrant and gay rights work showed me that both groups do it. Immigrants are hardworking like you and your ancestors... Gays are citizens just like you and your ancestors. Immigrants aren't criminals and all they want is the American Dream like you do. Gays are heteronormative, and want the white picket fenced home just like you do. (You being hypothetical you... not you per se dear friend.) oooh! And I almost forgot one part.... women... women can't be male and rich, so they marry him. :) Weren't you ever encouraged to marry a rich guy??? If not by your family, a soap opera or a movie certainly did. It's the modus operandi for women.

So where do kids fit into all of this? They too want to be like their friends at school and have a "normal" family. Kids, specially teenagers, are not interested in making waves. They want to fit in and be just like everyone else is. They want to be accepted by their peers, and have the same things their peers have... including a legally recognized family. Therefore, I really don't think it's the gay movement per se who is abusing kids, but kids coming forward themselves as Tobi mentioned.

And about Neiley becoming a "manipulative bullshitter and a pompous twit," good for him. We need more manipulative bullshitters an pompous twits on our side. You and I can't do it alone gurl!

Tags:

Let’s face it. You cannot get all the items you need or want locally. We do my best to buy my fruits and vegetables at the farmer’s market to minimize our carbon footprint. Most recently, Leslie and I went to the grocery store and looked at imported tomatoes longingly. They, plus the avocados from our tree, would make a killer guacamole. Not to mention salads and sauces. We didn’t waver on our commitment and moved on leaving the red rubies behind.  But what about coffee, tea, chocolate and other food items we consume regularly? Yes, they are fair trade, but what about their carbon footprint?

 

Today I bought 5 pounds of coffee at Grounds for Change. The total price including shipping was $46.15, or $9.23. A fairly decent price. We buy this coffee because it’s produced at a women-owned cooperative in Peru, and it’s a fair trade product. My father was from Peru, so I figured it would be great to help women who could have been my family. Also, by buying their Café Femenino through their site, Grounds for Change guarantees that women were involved in the marketing of the coffee as well. Wanna fight women’s pay disparities? Then support women-owned business. Café Femenino enables us to fight poverty in Peru, and empower women through the simple gesture of enjoying the “right” cup of coffee.

 

Which gets me to the point of the carbon footprint. How much carbon is emitted by 5 pounds of coffee traveling all the way from a cooperativa in Peru to my doorstep? My guess is that’s it’s quite a lot. I was unable to find a product-specific footprint calculator. All the calculators I found were lifestyle-based and calculated overall total footprint. But if you think about it, the coffee had to travel from the cooperativa to the port of exit in Peru, to the U.S., to California, to my doorstep. Sounds like a lot of travel when compared to my oranges that come from Fresno or tomatoes from Bakersfield. More travel equals more carbon.

 

So here is the conundrum. How can you help the planet while at the same time you are hurting the planet? Empowering lower income people, while developing a global middle-class, is probably the only way to ensure that social justice becomes more prevalent. Raising the living standard also ensures that people are better educated. The more education, the better solutions we can create for a dying world.

 

Currently, the solution we have found in the era of globalization is to exchange goods with underdeveloped areas through a fair system where the local economy is not sacrificed so we can get low prices. This system implies that goods will travel around the world in order to reach us, be it coffee from Peru, chocolate from Ghana, or tea from Indonesia, among others. As mentioned above, the transport of these goods generate carbon emissions.

 

Anyone who follows the news must have no problem realizing that the environment hurts the less fortunate more. Katrina is a good American example. In the rest of the world, excessive rains punish those whose homes are constructed out of cardboard, or who have no means to afford homes in no-flood areas. The images of homes being washed away almost exclusively include low-income homes. Global warming has been said to be of a greater and more disastrous impact on lower-income people. This follows the sad tradition of environmental racism, where low-income, mostly people of color neighborhoods are located in areas where pollution levels are extremely high.

 

Then the question is, does fair trade help or hurt the people it’s supposed to aid?

 

I don’t know about you, but I haven’t seen much debate on this area. This is particularly true in the area of social justice … if there is, please let me know about it.

 

I don’t have an answer to this problem, but I must admit that as I researched for this post I was very pleased to find out that Grounds for Change is working on becoming a zero carbon footprint coffee distributor. It seems that there may be hope. The question is, Will we get there on time?

Tags: globalization | global warming | fair trade | organic | pollution