Inciting A Riot

Dear Old Pagans...

2012-02-28T09:38:00.000-06:00

Some Old Pagans thought it time to give the smackdown to us Young Pagans. I'm smacking back.

There's a meme that's getting started in the pagan blogosphere in which one writes a letter to young pagans, exasperatedly begging them to quit their foolish ways. It seems to have begun here and is propagated by the Daily Pagan News tumblr. While many of these points are things I've talked about in the past, and many of them I agree with, I feel they are more universal than aimed directly at the young. Also, there were several points, on both posts, that I had to go back and make sure this post was about 'young' pagans, as I've only seen this behavior exhibited by the older folks in our community.

So, in the interest of fairness, and because it's been a while since I've done one of my lovely lists, here is my message to "old" pagans (or pagans that think they've been around the witchy block a time or seven). Also, it might help if you read the two letters to Young Pagans first, as I reference their points. Ahem:

Before you go getting high and mighty about telling the young witchy girl in her diaphanous garb to quit bleating Never Again the Burning Times, why don't you figure out where she got that information? The pagan community has Sheeple, too, and they had to learn from someone. So, Old Pagan, how about you make sure that all the folks in YOUR age/experience group stop teaching this garbage, and the young folks will stop parroting it back as though it were gospel.
Please, stop thinking science and academic research is the enemy. It isn't. However, there is a place where the two can meet, where you can have an academic understanding of how something works (such as the celestial bodies that fly across the sky are not chariots or wolves or houses, but rather a huge chunk of rock that reflects the other huge ball of burning gas) and also hold to your faith. We, as a species, have come a long way since the time when we believed the lightning only struck because a god was pissed at us. We have a greater understanding of how the world works, and it can only serve to better our relationship with the divine - which, last time I checked, many of us consider to either be nature or to be in nature.
How about we just quit bitching about what someone wears? Generally speaking. How about we just quit bitching about one particular look? Yes, there are folks that join this path and then feel they need to wear all black with black makeup and more jewelry than any Spencer's or Hot Topic could possibly provide. There are also, oh dear Old Pagan, the delightful Unwashed Hippy Pagans (who are simply a delight to sit next to at a meet-up...not), and the Pagan that Knits Everything She Wears, and the Trenchcoat Pagan that seems to be oblivious that a massive black leather trench coat looks like they're about to shoot up the coffee shop. Suffice it to say, many people have a look. My only beef with this is when you say you dress the way you do because that's the way pagans should dress. Real pagans look like anybody and everybody. Yes, there is the group that dresses goth-lite, but there's also the group that can't buy regular clothes and must only buy from some extra green, extra organic, extra hempy goodness retailer because all the chain clothing stores have the blood of Asian children on their hands. There is no pagan look. And may I introduce you to Project Pagan Enough?
The Broom Closet is a tricky place to be in. And, Old Pagan, while you might have had the most wonderful, liberating experience sitting down with your Christian parents and telling them all about how you love dancing naked under a full moon, it's not so easy for some. For some of us, we have several closets we live in, and we can only come out of one at a time for fear of our parents having a heart attack. For others, our paths are our own, and having our parents involved or know about them makes little difference, though it may not serve to better our relationship. So, I'm glad you either didn't care about your relationship with your parents, or you had a fabulous coming out experience, but why don't you leave us Young Pagans the hell alone about coming out. It's none of your business when it happens, and we like it just fine that way.
Maybe my pet is my familiar, and you're just jealous because your cat isn't magical.
Also, about spelling... I'm glad that you want us young whipper snappers to have good spelling when it comes to words like 'Christian' and 'Pantheon' and 'Religion', but how about you learn how to spell the word 'magic'? I get that some of you were taught by your precious booky-books that 'magic' isn't magic until it's spelled with a 'k' or a 'j' or both at the same time in a beastly display of orgiastic grammar fuckupery, but the word in the dictionary is spelled 'm-a-g-i-c'. This list could go on, but just know that you might want to practice what you preach.
Looking at who is doing the blogging behind the two posts above, I notice nobody is over 30. (So I wonder about this note to 'young pagans'.) In fact, a few of them aren't over 25. The initial poster is 29. So, I am glad that they know all about Christians not being the enemy, but please don't act like that is something you've gotten with age and being in the craft and learning from your elders. I have seen dozens and dozens of Old Pagans espousing the evils of Christianity and perpetuating a culture of fear when it comes to What the Christians are Doing! Take a look around the pagan blogosphere. Some of the biggest and most read pagan blogs out there (some masquerading as "news" blogs) seem to focus on the evils of Christendom on a daily basis. It's there, and it's a lot older than us Young Pagans. But, no, Christians/Muslims/Sikhs/Atheists/Scientists/Anybody Else are not the enemy. Nobody is the enemy. You...no...WE are our own worst enemy when it comes to the growth of our culture and community. All our bickering and in-fighting is splintering what little bit of community we've managed to build up in the last 50-60 years. How about you take a look at that, Old Pagan?
Stop asking to be called an Elder. Period. If someone wants to bestow you with the title of 'elder', then that means you are their elder. They are showing you a sign of respect. But, I do not have that relationship with you, and you telling me I should respect you because you are a 'Pagan Elder' or 'Community Elder' or whatever just makes me that less likely to do so. Being old doesn't make you an elder. At least, it doesn't make you mine. Having lived through all the Biblical plagues and the Great Depression and both Bushes doesn't make you my elder. Having every single book published by Llewellyn memorized along with the ability to quote Budapest and Starhawk and Gardner and Buckland verbatim from rote memory also doesn't make you my elder. In fact, being named Budapest, Starhawk, Gardner, or Buckland, or any of another dozen Big Pagan Names doesn't make you my elder.

There is no age at which you are no longer a 'Young Pagan'. Ok... 70. 80. Somewhere in that neighborhood. Maybe then I cannot seriously call you a 'young pagan'. Because, pagans are all ages, and they can start on their paths any time. I've had a number of folks email me over the years expressing gratitude for finding good research amongst the cacophony of terrible opinions/experiences (opinionsperiences as it were, Mnemosyne)-as-evidence. These folks had just started their path and were confused by the self-referencing, self-congratulating, self-conflicting nature of the current lot of Big Name Pagan Books. And, they're 30 or 56 or 64 or 16, and they're just starting on their pagan path.

A thirst for knowledge and Spirit doesn't have an age. It also has little requirements. Sure, you can dress your particular brand of crazy up with all the High Ceremony and accoutrements you want, but it doesn't make you closer to the Divine or more correct than anybody else. Just because you're old or you've read a lot of books or you know big words or you can have a discussion about Rosicrucianism and the Golden Dawn in context doesn't mean you know any more about what lies on the other side of the veil than anybody else.

I'm a fairly smart guy. I've got some degrees and I know big words and I can argue theology with the best of them - and have done so on a few occasions. I'll be turning 26 next month. That puts me being on my path going on about 12-13 years now. I've, technically, been a Pagan longer than the 29 year old who initially posted and a lot longer than the 22 year old who runs the Pagan News Blog. However, that doesn't mean I know any more about anything in paganism than they do. In fact, I probably know a lot less. I'm sure of it. I'm constantly baffled by how smart our community actually is. They know history and facts and dates and volumes upon volumes of mystical lore and folktales and herbalism and geology and geomancy and the list goes on. Our community is full of brilliance. Yet, we let our in-fighting and our exasperation of the Old/Young/Goth/Prep/Smart/Uninformed/Ambiguously Defined Pagan groups continue to keep us divided.

Next month is March, which means a revamping and reissuing of Project Pagan Enough. Before that happens, though, I'd like for us all to take a look at its tenets as currently worded. This finger pointing has to stop. Yes, I did some finger pointing above, but I did it to demonstrate that no group is free and clear of criticism. No group knows more or less about the divine or the Mysteries than anyone else.

It's time - Young and Old Pagans - woke up to that.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Videos made of Transvaginal, Quran Burning, and Homeopathic Goodness.

2012-02-24T12:21:00.000-06:00

Let's go fry some other fish, shall we?

There's a lot of mess still to be resolved with the ongoing discussion of Pantheacon. Elsewhere, however, the world is still turning and there are some...well...incredible things going on in the world.

In seriously invasive news: Here in the United States, the debate is raging about women's reproductive rights in America. One such controversy is going on in Virginia as we speak, with the state voting to force women to undergo a medically unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound before being allowed to get an abortion. The phenomenal Jon Stewart covered part of the controversy on his show. Enjoy...

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart

In a brilliant turn of events, a new bill has been introduced by Representative Yasmin Neal that would limit vasectomies for men except in the case where not getting one would "result in death or 'impairment of a major bodily function.'" This is in obvious response to men deciding what women should and should not receive as far as health care goes - what with all-male panels being convened to discuss women's reproductive rights. Last night, Rep. Neal was on the Rachel Maddow show. The video can be found here. I would post it, but NBC apparently doesn't like the ability for their clips to be embedded. Suffice it say, you should totally watch it.

In literally under fire news: Also, NATO is coming under some serious fire, because, earlier this week, they incinerated a number of copies of the Quran - the Muslim holy book.

A military official said the materials were removed from a detainee center's library because they had "extremist inscriptions" on them and there was "an appearance that these documents were being used to facilitate extremist communications."

This act has been taken quite seriously in Afghanistan, where international tensions are already incredibly high in a part of the world where bloodshed for religious reasons is a daily occurrence. This is the 4th day of demonstrative fallout regarding the holy book burnings, and reports from CNN say that at least 8 people have died and 27 have been wounded.

President Obama has called the burning of the Quran an "unintentional error."

In homeopathic news: Friend of the show and fellow podcaster Carrie Poppy - of Oh No, Ross and Carrie! - has been getting some attention for a video she uploaded on the James Randi Foundation's website. The video depicts her taking an incredibly large dose of homeopathic remedy 'Coldcalm', which is sold at Rite Aid and manufactured by Boiron Laboratories. It further shows her calling the poison control center to alert them to her extreme dosage, only to be told not to worry, that homeopathic remedies like Coldcalm have no medication in them and do nothing for you. She eventually calls Boiron...only to be left dissatisfied, and eventually turns to the tried-and-true medication Sudafed.

The video is hilarious, and it begs the question of you Rioters, "What do YOU think about taking homeopathic remedies instead of traditional medication?"

Leave your views of homeopathy, as well as any of the topics discussed, in the comments below!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Episode 68: Inciting A Conventional Riot

2012-02-22T14:55:00.000-06:00

Episode 68: Inciting A Conventional Riot is a timely look at the ongoing conversation surrounding the controversy from the 2012 PantheaCon event that specifically excluded transgender women from a 'women-only' event.

Special guest Sophia Catherine of the Divine Community podcast joins me to discuss the various aspects of the controversy and to provide some perspective on the issue.

It should be noted: no specific conclusions or decisions, for lack of a better term, are reached in this episode. It would not be fair to make such assumptions, as all parties involved have not had a chance to speak.

It should also be noted, however, that both Z. Budapest and the organizers of Pantheacon were contacted for interview and/or statement. Z. did not respond, and the one PantheaCon representative that was interested in speaking was later denied permission to speak by Glenn Turner, the head of PantheaCon.

When I reached out for interviews, I contacted the 'programming' email address and the 'info' email address. A reply came from Jamie, the co-head of Programming for Pantheacon 2012. She was willing to give an interview if Glenn Turner, the chair of Pantheacon gave permission. I replied to both Glenn and Jamie, thanking them for their time and assuring them I would love the opportunity for them to speak for themselves rather than reading third party information online. This is the response I received this morning from Glenn:

Hi Fire Lyte
I'm sorry but Jamie is NOT authorized to speak for PantheaCon in aninterview such as you suggest.
I just got home yesterday at 4 pm and went straight to bed with asore throat. However I would NOT be interested in an interview todayor likely any day. Words can too easily be taken out of context.
Perhaps in a while, once I've had some time to finish my work with theCon and my shop, I can craft a statement.

Personally, I wish the organizers would actually speak to the public, and further answer questions - or at least not stop someone who is willing to speak from doing so. However, that is their prerogative. Draw your own conclusions about what their decision not to speak on the matter means about the importance they place on the controversy at hand.

Please send any thoughts on these issues to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Gender Exclusivity at Pantheacon - 2012 Edition

2012-02-21T00:17:00.000-06:00

Maybe this was supposed to be irony?

There are a lot of people very upset at one particular event that went on at Pantheacon this year. For the second year in a row - from the information I've seen - an event has been put on for 'Women Only' that has denied access to transgendered women. Some information on this year's and last year's issues can be found here and here. Also, this is the CAYA coven's official response regarding last year's gender exclusion.

For a quick breakdown - all coming from third-party sources, as I am not actually at Pantheacon this year (only one pagan vacation per year, and PPSM3 is mine) - what you need to know is this: This year, allegedly, Z. Budapest held a ritual for genetic women only. I'm not sure - because I've read conflicting reports - as to whether transgender women attempted to get in and were turned away or whether it is causing an uproar because transgender women are barred generally. Either way, for the second year in a row, the only thing anyone will remember about Pantheacon is this story.

UPDATE: Lupa, who was actually there, has given a recounting of the goings-on here. Apparently, no transgender women attempted to enter the event. Likewise, none were allowed in due to the exclusion of "Genetic Women Only." The Pagan Newswire Collective and T. Thorn Coyle - who organized a silent protest outside the event - have posted their accounts, which can be followed via the links provided. Either way... this is...

Sad.

Now, this is a new year and a new Riot. Normally, you'd probably expect me to thrust a pitchfork in the direction of Z. Budapest or throw a torch on the Pantheacon organizers for having this be an issue 2 years in a row. I'm not going to do that today. For one thing, I am not at Pantheacon, and I could be getting incorrect third party information - the internet is lovely that way. For another, I think there is a greater discussion to be had. To touch on these points, specifically, for a moment, however:

It's Z. Budapest. She does this kind of thing. It's like being mad at Christian Day for going on TV. It's his thing. Would I do it? No. Am I surprised in the least that Z., given the opportunity, did this? Absolutely not.
Should the organizers at Pantheacon force inclusivity and bar exclusivity? Well.... That's the greater conversation I think needs to be had.

Here goes...

If you want to have a coven filled with cisgender black women that were born in the moon sign of Virgo and the sun sign of Leo on a Tuesday before the year 1997, you are more than welcome to do that. Have at it. I hope that you find spiritual fulfillment with the group of your choosing. If you want to have a pagan meet-up filled with people who are only pagan parents - meaning that you cannot attend if you have never had children - then, by all means, do it. It is absolutely your prerogative in your personal life to find a group of people where you feel that you belong. It is your private life. It is your choice, and nobody should fault you for it. I may think your decision or group is odd, but you might think it's odd that I spend at least 3 hours a week reading comic books.

We're all weird.

Also, I think it is absolutely your prerogative to hold a ritual for gay men only or straight women only or white men or asian lesbians or bottle blonde men under 5' 10". As long as it is clearly posted so that those folks seeing your ritual posting know whether they can attend. Again, it's your life and your event. You can hold it for whomever you wish.

Just so we're clear: I believe in your personal life, you can surround yourself with whatever group you feel fits you best. Don't be ashamed of it. Own it. If other people have a problem with it, it's their confusion, their problem. Private. Life.

However, unless we're living in a society of hermits, you have to be in public at some point. In fact, you have to be in public often. And, the funny thing about community is that it is, inherently, about the public.

Also, funny thing.... Cons. Steampunk Con. ComicCon. Leather Ball. Whatever. Conventions are public forums where we can let a particular freak flag fly. Publicly. We pay money. We travel from all over the world. We wear costumes and discuss the things we love with people that understand, because in our regular 9 to 5 lives we rarely find people that understand. Conventions, at least the ones I've been to, are about making us feel included, accepted, in the little niches of society that we want to be part of. It's a type of validation, in a way, to know that you're not the only one. To know there are hundreds, thousands, of people that think you're not weird. That think you're actually pretty awesome just the way you are.

There's also something about hosting a public event, that people paid to attend, and not discriminating against those people that paid to attend. To bring this back to Pantheacon... I get that this is a religious convention. I get that, by its very nature, people are being forced to put their incredibly private relationship with divinity on display for a bunch of people they've never met. I get that it can be a bit difficult or strange or odd to put yourself out there.........

But isn't that the point of a Con?

To go and be a freak with the rest of the freaks?

Isn't that what people paid their money and got a hotel room a year in advance and traveled from around the country to do? To feel included? I mean...correct me if I'm wrong, but this is not a private event. This isn't at someone's house or at a covenstead. It's a public event. There are organizers and advertisers and people selling goods. According to the event's website, over 2000 people attend this event. The theme this year is Unity in Diversity (which is probably a callback from last year's debacle).

In that kind of environment - in my opinion - your ability to discriminate is eliminated. Your right to discriminate ends at someone else's right not to be discriminated against. This is the public sphere, the public sector, and different rules apply.

We do not have whites only lunch counters or 'colored' restrooms or gender-specific jobs anymore. These fights have come and been won. We have had to scrape and claw and fight for our rights, because nobody seems willing to say 'Hey, we're all the same.' Gay people can serve openly in the military. Women can vote. It's 2012. Why is this a conversation we're having?

I firmly, fully, and completely support your right to fill your personal circle, coven, group, whatever with the kind of people you desire. It's your life. It's your personal life. If you're going to have a public event, especially an event of this size and caliber, then you don't get to discriminate. And, honestly, I believe that there are actual legal issues here that could be addressed should someone have the resources to lodge such a complaint. The organizers of this event have a lot on their plates, I'm sure.

I'm positive that they're doing the best they know how, and that there are factors here I'm not privy to and that I have facts missing. And, I think that they're trying to walk the line between allowing the various presenters to have an event done his or her way while also running an inclusive event.

I've seen the argument that, hey, there should be the option for a cisgender-only event as long as it's clearly marked and advertised as such. I've seen arguments saying that the rights of Z. Budapest and her flavor of Dianic Wicca are being violated by folks attempting to force inclusiveness of individuals she is not comfortable with in her event. Basically, I've seen several people make the claim that If she wants to be a bigot, that's ok, as long as she follows these Rules of Being A Bigot in Public. I think when you're talking about 'Unity in Diversity', and you codify how and when someone can be a bigot, you've already lost your own argument.

And, yes, at other Conventions there are all sorts of events that, by their nature, exclude others. At a gaming convention, there might be a panel on the latest Zelda game, which sort of excludes folks that want to discuss the latest Halo installment. But, there's a difference in limiting one class or another to a set of knowledge (such as Hey, let's talk about Zelda!) and limiting who can learn that knowledge (such as Hey, if you play Halo, you can't come to this event!). Maybe both sides of the issue could learn something if we were put into one room and given the opportunity to grow.

At Pantheacon this year, CAYA coven (the one at the heart of last year's transgender-denying debacle) hosted a 'self-identified women only' event. There were men-only events. But, does the offering of an alternative event fix the problem? I'm sorry...but that sounds like 'Separate But Equal' to me. You aren't allowed to attend this event, but we'll set this other event up over there...in another room...away from us...at a different time...with different people. See how that's the same thing? You're totally included!

In this Rioter's opinion, there is no room for exclusivity at a public, paid for, sponsored (with advertisements, etc.) Convention. These are supposed to be places of safety for small communities, and these types of actions only serve to further separate and divide an already small community.

What do YOU think? Does it being a public event matter? Should the fact that it's a religious type of event matter? Should we get to have our personal discriminations and exclusions accommodated in a venue such as Pantheacon?

And, before you answer, consider this: It's one thing for someone to be racist in their own home. It is a completely different thing to disallow people, because of race, from eating at your restaurant, going to your church, receiving a scholarship, or attending a school.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Ask a Werewolf!

2012-02-20T17:10:00.001-06:00

Alongside Vampires and Zombies, Werewolves are experiencing a pop culture resurgence. Movies like Twilight and the Wolfman and television shows like True Blood, Teen Wolf, and Being Human have made werewolves a part of our modern day vernacular. Of course, it's interesting... They're a lot prettier than they used to be.

Think about it... This is the original Wolfman:

And this is the new one...

Ok... Bad example. Benicio del Toro..... Not my cup of tea. But think about it. Twilight has Taylor Lautner. There's that hot guy from Teen Wolf, and then there's Joe Manganiello from True Blood. Let's bask in that glory for just a moment...

Gods bless that man.

But...did you know that there are real werewolves? Yes! Different types, actually. And, I will be interviewing one for an upcoming show. Now, here's the good part. YOU get to ask a werewolf anything you want.

In the comments section below, or in an email to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com, please send in between 1-3 questions that YOU would want to ask a real live werewolf, should you be sitting down with them. No question is off limits.

Can't wait to Inciting A Howling Riot with you all! Send in those questions!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Meeting René Lalonde (a short story of SQUEE!!!)

2012-02-18T23:01:00.001-06:00

RENÉ LALONDE, Wherever a Paper Boat Takes You, acrylic on canvas, image size: 24 × 24 inches.
This is my favorite piece by Lalonde.

Rarely do we get to meet those people who inspire us. René Lalonde is one of those artists for me. His art takes me to an incredibly magical world. We draw from many wells to create the pool of our inner selves, and the waters I draw from Lalonde are powerfully introspective.

And...last night... I got to meet him.

Yeah... It was late, and I had just gotten off work. Forgive my atrocious appearance. A gallery close to my job was having an exhibit, and I'd sold some paintings to one of the girls that works there. She knew that I love Lalonde, and she invited me. I got there just as they were getting ready to go out to eat. He was incredibly kind, and even said he liked my art. (My friend had shown him some pieces on her computer beforehand. I blushed. In fact, you can still see my face is red in the picture. Oh, and since we're talking about it, you should TOTALLY go buy some of my art. It's Lalonde-approved!) I got his autograph and everything. J-O-Y!

All in all, it was a wonderful evening.

Sometimes, when you meet your heroes, they do live up to your expectations. I hope you get to meet someone who inspires YOU one day. If you could...who would it be?

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Slut Armor

2012-02-18T10:07:00.000-06:00

Growing up, I had a lot of problems with my body. Truth be told, I still do. Everything from the nose that has always been too large for my face, to my ears that turned me into an elf (I still get told I look like Legolas), to my chest - my rib cage is slightly concave, to a number of other issues. My small town classmates made sure I knew that I was ugly and unwanted, and I helped them out by supplying my own insecurities.

That's why, when I graduated high school, I was shocked to find that there was a big world out there. And there were a lot of people who were, all of a sudden, interested in me.

I had my first kiss 3 days after high school graduation with the quarterback of a local Christian university. Within the next week, I visited my first gay club. In that one night, more people told me that they thought I was hot than had ever happened in my entire life. I was instantly shoved into a new category of person.

What you have to understand about me is that there is well-photographed evidence that I used to be so uncomfortable about my body, that I would wear socks with sandals, and pull them so high they nearly came to my knees. The less skin I could show, the better. Shirts worn were at least 2 sizes too big. I had a 28" waist (I know...I'm jealous of me at 18, too), but I was wearing XXL shirts. I had encased myself in a cloud of clothing, trying to hide myself.

But, then there was that first kiss, that first real date, that first trip to the gay club.

I began to learn that there were sizes smaller than XXL. In fact, I began to realize that those hours I spent at the gym nearly 7 days a week had given me a decent body. I had the 18-year-old makings of abs and calves and all those wonderful things you look at on a guy. I was ready to evolve.

For a couple of years, I had clothes that I would wear to go to school, work, and daily life, but then there was the wardrobe that was exclusively used to worship the dance floor. The shirts so tight, I was poured into them on Saturday evening before going out. The jeans so close to my skin, that it was as though I were wearing a second skin - one that made my butt look really good. Oh yeah, I found out I was a good dancer. A great dancer.

Sparrow over at the Wigglian Way had a segment on their most recent show about people being called 'slut' or 'whore', and having those names be hurled based on attire. And, on instinct, I wanted to initially respond with a clinical, sociological approach to the topics of how society reacts to certain types of people and dress and why. There is history and psychology and mass shame that goes in to our derision of 'sluts' and 'whores.' Sometimes, it can be jealousy, but others it can be that the whole is against something, so - despite personal beliefs - we must be, too.

Instead, I'm responding with this. This confessional. I've been with a lot of people. Well, for the gay community, I've barely had much fun at all. But, for most, I'd probably be considered a slut. A whore. There are people that I've slept with whose names I do not remember, and I barely remember their faces.

At this point in the story, people usually say 'I'm not proud of it, but there it is.' I'm not going to say that. I am proud. I'm proud that I was able to claw my way out of intense depression and body dysmorphia. I'm proud that I discovered myself as a sexual being, and not just the ugly nerd who was far too into comic books and magic. I'm proud that, when I went to the dance floor, people turned to watch. I'm proud that I discovered I had a power within me I never fathomed I had, and I'm proud that I used it.

For me, my tight clothes and accessories were armor. They carried me through the battlefield of self-acceptance. Now, I know from classes on psychology that this type of dress is not always indicative of that type of mentality. Sometimes it is a desperate plea for any attention whatsoever. Sometimes it is for a number of negative reasons. But, not for me. That was not my experience.

Though, I was still labeled a 'bitch' because when guys propositioned me that I was not interested in, I declined. My refusal to have sex with anyone and everyone made me a bitch - the gay community is funny like that. And, yeah, I've been called a 'slut' and a 'whore', but it was by people that had no clue how many people I actually slept with. In fact, I'd dare say it had less to do with my bedroom gymnastics and more to do with the fact that I was dancing or making out with the guy they wanted to dance or make out with. Oh well.

Today, I wear my body comfortably. I cannot change the saggy skin under my eyes (thanks, parents, for those genetics), nor can I change my prodigious nose. My ears grew to fit my body, finally. I'm a 34" waist now, which fits my 6' 6" frame better. Those hours at the gym have helped my chest, somewhat, but that is still an area of insecurity.

But, I still have one or two pieces of armor in the back of my closet, some jeans, that aren't nearly as tight as I once wore, but they do the job when my inner battle lines are drawn.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Grammar Police: Mr. Grey and his gray sweater.

2012-02-15T15:54:00.002-06:00

Grammar and spelling are most people's least favorite subjects, and for those of us that adore them we become the bane of dinner parties. Politely correcting a person's syntax doesn't make one very popular. However, today's warrant issued by the Grammar Police is over the words 'gray' and 'grey'.

Much speculation has been done in the world of grammar as to what the proper spelling of that color that lies between white and black. There is even a website devoted entirely to the subject.

As the website says, but dictionaries will not tell you, the proper spelling - in America - for the color gray is grAy. With an A. In America, if you spell the word G-R-E-Y, you are spelling someone's name.

Yes, folks, spelling can be different between European English and American English. Such differences can be seen in the words:

Color in America & Colour in England
Theater in America & Theatre in England
Monologue in America & Monolog in England

So, I suppose I'm being nit-picky here, but that is the job of an Officer of the Grammar Police. If you are in America, and you are addressing Mr. Grey (or discussing my favorite comic character, Jean Grey), then you end the word in -ey. If, however, you are discussing the color, it is not capitalized and it ends in -ay.

Spelling it grey sounds like you're inviting people over for tea, which, if you are, I shall cease complaining and bat my eyelashes and promise to bring the sugar lumps. Also, it sounds pretentious and purposefully hipster - using a spelling that is reserved for other countries and isn't used by the majority of the population in your own country - and is mildly douchestastic. So, no, you don't look cool, and nobody will mistake you for a Brit just because you spell something incorrectly.

Remember the sentence: Mr. Grey wears a gray sweater.

All shall be well.

You have been served.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

My Academic and Personal Search for Forgiveness

2012-02-12T05:28:00.000-06:00

When you were young and magic was new, you were taught how to do spells and rites from your parents. Yes. You were. Despite religious affiliation or moral apprehension at the notion of doing magic, you were taught how to perform some of the most ancient and powerful spells humans can know. One of these spells involves two words of power, two words that can evoke incredible reactions and cause total change in your environment, two words that can literally alter the way your life’s path curves. They were handed to you at such a young age that you may have forgotten their power by now. What are these two words? I’m sorry.

Why are they so powerful? Why do I call them a spell? Well, they are words of power that are evoking a marvelous change. Also, it’s a sensational opening paragraph that gets you to read on. Either way, the two words in and of themselves do not mean much of anything without the second part. See, this spell is interactive. It requires the participation of more than one person. The second party/parties must recognize the spell’s call and then choose to impart the gift of forgiveness. It is a choice, after all, and not a guaranteed reaction - as it is with almost all of magic, never being guaranteed a result.

What is forgiveness? Why is it important? What does it do for us, personally, and for others? What are its types and its opposites? All these questions will be examined, but first I would like to explain why this question is coming up for me today.

There is a man named Mark Berndt whose name has been racing through the headlines recently for acts of sexual depravity against young children the likes of which are incredibly rare and incredibly disturbing. He was an elementary school teacher in a Los Angeles area school called Miramonte Elementary School for 31 years. On January 21, 2012, he was arrested and charged with 23 counts of lewd conduct with children, a charge that carries a punishment in California of 15 years to life. He is currently being held on a $23 million dollar bail, $1 million dollars for every count against him. Why so much? Because the kinds of crimes he committed were so extraordinarily appalling.

In his over 30 years of teaching children, he victimized young boys and girls between the ages of 7 and 10. He blindfolded them, fed them his semen with a spoon, put cockroaches on their faces, gagged them, bound them, and had the gall to photograph everything. He was only discovered after a film processor saw that 40 images Berndt was attempting to develop depicted the aforementioned crimes. It is expected that Berndt will serve multiple life sentences.

This kind of case puts my usually over-extended ability to forgive in a precarious position. It also brings to mind the famous C.S. Lewis quote, “Everyone says forgiveness is a lovely idea until they have something to forgive.”

I do not know this man. I do not live in California. I do not have children that go to school at Miramonte, nor do I have any children beyond my prodigiously possessive Pomeranian and my formidably fat cat. I am not sure I have the right to feel the kind of hatred that I do about or towards this man. Yet, I do. When I heard this story for the first time, and as I’ve followed it in the weeks since, I have this deep pit of hatred for this man whom I’ve never met. However…

I grew up in a Christian household. I grew up around a central idea of forgiveness. Jesus was the giver of forgiveness. We were to be like Jesus and forgive others of their wrongdoings against us. The Lord’s Prayer has a line that asks Yahweh’s aspect of God the Father to ‘…forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those that trespass against us.’ So… Forgiveness. It’s pretty big for most folks. And, it’s not just Christianity that espouses forgiveness.

Judaism requires its adherents to forgive, expressly forbidding wronged individuals not to grant forgiveness. (Mishneh Torah, Teshuvah 2:10) Islam also preaches forgiveness, and one of the names for their god literally means ‘The All-Forgiving’ (Al-Ghaffur). Eastern philosophies like Buddhism and Hinduism take a karmic approach to forgiveness that is quite psychological in nature. According to those philosophies, one should allow forgiveness so that the wrong done to you does not further wreck your mental well-being. There are almost no religions in the world that do not preach forgiveness.

Here is where I falter. Here is where I scratch my head, because forgiveness is typically seen in a religious light. Most of the time, I can agree that all beings deserve divine absolution, for it is our destiny to learn the lessons of life - perhaps over several lifetimes of learning them - and merge with the divine at the end of our journey. Atonement. Forgiveness. These concepts are central to learning such lessons, but it is severely limiting as a human with the emotional spectrum of a human to look at a person who has done the things that the above-mentioned criminal (and the rest of the folks in history who have committed heinous acts against humanity) has done…and think that they should be forgiven, too.

It might interest you to note that forgiveness was not seen as a topic fit for academic study until as late as the 1980s. Before that it was strictly seen as a religious topic with little psychological, sociological, or academic merit. Boy, did the academic community get it wrong. I suppose we can forgive their inattention…this time. Luckily, there is now a wealth of quality research about forgiveness that we can examine.

Forgiveness, as a word, comes to us from the Old English word ‘forgiefan’, which meant ‘give, grant, allow; forgive’ . It also meant ‘to give up’ and ‘to give in marriage’. When you break the word down to its base parts, it is made of the words for-, meaning completely, and giefan, meaning give. Originally, it is easy to see what this kind of word might have meant, especially in the marriage connotation. It’s a common idea that marriage requires you to give yourself to your partner completely, that there should be no part of you that is not your beloved’s, and vice versa. You are giving up your former life and beginning a new one. But, as was said above, the entire word hinges on the choice to do so, the choice to grant that forgiveness, which, given our newfound understanding of the word, is a bit redundant.

But, forgiveness has a slightly more modern definition. English has many words that borrow from other languages, and forgiveness became mixed up with the Latin word ‘perdonare’ (naturally, this is where we get the word ‘pardon’). When you mixed the completely giving up sense of the original ‘forgiefan’ and the ideas of absolution from punishment in ‘perdonare’, you get the modern word ‘forgive’ that now means ‘to give up the desire or power to punish.’

You see, by definition, when you forgive someone, you are giving up both the desire and the power to continue to punish that person for their wrongdoing. If I can digress for just a moment, this seems to be in direct contrast with the modern notion of ‘forgive and forget’. This phrase has led many a person to say something along the lines of, “I might be able to forgive, but I will never forget.” This seems to imply almost that forgiveness is superficial (the ubiquitous child that has said ‘I’m sorry,’ so often that it has lost all meaning), and you are choosing to harbor a grudge or resentment against the wrongdoer. You are continuing to punish the person and yourself by holding on to the negative feelings associated with the wrong done. This doesn’t seem very forgiving, especially now that we know where the word comes from.

Also, I am beginning to sense a pattern in all of this. Religions of all shapes and sizes say that forgiveness is something good for the wrongdoer. We should be seeking forgiveness for when we act against someone, and - in many cases - the person who has been wronged is required to forgive it. This is all beginning to seem very one-sided. What if Jenny stole my juice box, but then apologizes? I might not want to forgive Jenny, because I’m now juice-less. And, being juice-less is an incredibly sad state of being. Maybe I’m not ready to forgive until restitution of the juice is made. With interest.

In a 2007 WebMD article, Charlotte vanOyen Witvliet, PhD, said, “Despite the familiar cliche, 'forgive and forget,' most of us find forgetting nearly impossible. Forgiveness does not involve a literal forgetting. Forgiveness involves remembering graciously. The forgiver remembers the true though painful parts, but without the embellishment of angry adjectives and adverbs that stir up contempt.”

Let’s try and get selfish for a moment; it shouldn’t be hard. (Especially for us Americans.) What can forgiving do for me? I get that being forgiven can lift a weight of guilt off of one’s shoulders, and, by definition, it absolves one of further punishment, but what can forgiving someone do for me?

Continuing from the same article, Witvliet cites a 2001 study in which she examined 71 college age individuals. These individuals were monitored while focusing on both forgiving those that had wronged them in some way and on not forgiving.

"When focused on unforgiving responses, their blood pressure surged, their heart rates increased, brow muscles tensed, and negative feelings escalated," she says. "By contrast, forgiving responses induced calmer feelings and physical responses. It appears that harboring unforgiveness comes at an emotional and a physiological cost. Cultivating forgiveness may cut these costs."

Thanks to scientists finally deciding to examine forgiveness under a microscope, or stethoscope as it were, recent research shows that an ability to forgive those who wrong you can lead to lower blood pressure, a stronger immune system, a drop in stress hormones circulating in your blood stream, the disappearance of back pain, headaches, stomach problems, and a reducing of general anger, bitterness, resentment, depression, and other negative emotions.

So, does that mean if I can forgive Jenny for stealing my juice box, I won’t need to buy any more Excedrin? That can all depend on my relationship with Jenny and how much the juice box means to me. Research also shows that these benefits only come into play when one is forgiving something that they would otherwise not, something colloquially said to ‘weigh one down’. Such as, if I worked with a homophobic individual or if I was mugged or if I were raped, these instances are emotionally strong enough to cause the unforgiving to cause the aforementioned negative physiological effects. When someone says holding on to a negative situation is eating you from the inside, new science suggests they might be right.

How does one forgive, though, especially if the wrong is especially harsh or a source of deep scarring? Frederic Luskin, PhD, says that forgiveness is like love: it can’t be forced.

"You can't just will forgiveness," says Luskin, author of Forgive For Good: A Proven Prescription for Health and Happiness. "What I teach is that you can create conditions where forgiveness is more likely to occur. There are specific practices we offer that diminish hostility and self-pity, and increase positive emotions, so it becomes more likely that a genuine, heartfelt release of resentment will occur."

Luskin suggests that the act of keeping a gratitude journal can assist by slowly changing your thought dynamic to one where you focus on the positive things that happen in your life rather than the negative. In this way, one can forgive easier because they believe there is more positivity than negativity in their lives, thus making the pros outweigh the cons. "Gratitude is simply focusing your attention on the positive things that have happened," he says. "That creates a biochemical experience that makes it more likely that forgiveness will occur."

However, Luskin also discusses something called ‘cognitive reframing’, perhaps better known as a change of perspective. In other words, focusing on the facts of the situation and not about what might have been. You might wish you had a better job, lover, parent, life situation, but the facts are that you are in the place you are and no amount of forgiving or psychological back bending is going to change the facts of the matter.

The book Mea culpa: a sociology of apology and reconciliation by Nicholas Tavuchis says the following, “Very simply…an apology, no matter how sincere or effective, does not and cannot undo what has been done. And yet, in a mysterious way and according to its own logic, this is precisely what it manages to do.” Though, one could argue the latter statement, which Tavuchis does at length. The argument he poses in his book is whether there is such a thing as a true apology in the modern day, or, as was discussed above, have we moved into an era where the apology is so commonplace that one does not take it seriously.

Once someone has apologized, though, how does the process of forgiveness take place? In my research thus far, I have found two different types of forgiveness, though I’m sure further research would lend itself to the finding of dozens more. (After all, if forgiveness is like love we could study it forever and keep finding new types.)

Everett L. Worthington, Jr., PhD, not only has an awesomely ostentatious name, but he has the idea that there are two types of forgiveness: emotional and decisional. Decisional forgiveness, he defines, is the choice to let go of the angry thoughts surrounding the wrongdoing and specifically about the person who performed the act. He says this can be decided by telling yourself you will not seek revenge or that you will actively seek to avoid that person. However, the immediate argument is that this is not the type of true forgiveness Tavuchis would want - a type that ignores the facts of the matter and restores the emotions of the offender and offended to a time before the wrong. Thus, Worthington says the better method of forgiveness, and that which we should strive for, is emotional forgiveness.

When one is engaged in emotional forgiveness, the emotions surrounding the wrong are truly replaced. Bitterness, betrayal, hatred, agony, hostility, anger, etc. are replaced with love, compassion, sympathy, and empathy.

"Emotional forgiveness is where the health action is," says Worthington. "Emotional unforgiveness causes a chronic stress response, which results in obsessing about the wrong done to you. Rumination is what gets people into trouble. Rumination is the mental health bad boy. It's associated with almost everything bad in the mental health field -- obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety, depression ... probably hives too."

So forget an apple, forgive someone every day and you’ll live to be 1000. You might be able to tell that I’m still a bit skeptical about this total forgiveness thing. Not in cases where Jenny steals juice boxes or when someone lies to me or possibly even to those folks that wrong me in other ways. It’s the folks like the case we discussed at the beginning, with people acting so incongruently with the ideas of human decency, so outside the realm of what I feel I have the capacity to forgive, that I feel I enter into a realm of what researchers call ‘unforgiveness’.

In 1999 a joint study by Worthington and Wade cited in the 2003 article Empathy, Selfism, and Coping as Elements of the Psychology of Forgiveness: a preliminary study (whew…long title) says that unforgiveness is a ‘cold’ emotion characterized by “resentment, bitterness, and perhaps hatred, along with the motivated avoidance or retaliation against a transgressor.” By contrast, the article states that forgiveness is the conscious choice to relinquish unforgiveness and possibly seek reconciliation with the perpetrator - with the caveat that reconciliation be “safe, prudent, and possible”. The study suggests that empathy, humor, and/or love compete with the emotion of unforgiveness. This harkens back to the notion of decisional forgiveness we discussed earlier.

We keep talking about forgiveness being a choice. We’ve discussed what happens after we make that choice, to decide whether to be forgiving or unforgiving. What informs that choice? An often cited 1998 study by McCullough et al says that there are 4 different factors that affect whether one forgives. They are 1) Personality, 2) Relationship Quality, 3) Nature of Transgression, and 4) Social-Cognitive Variables. Because we don’t all speak Researchese, these variables might also be codified as 1) Selfish or Selfless, 2) how heavily invested you are in the relationship, 3) how you found out about the wrong-doing and how serious the wrongdoing was, and 4) whether the act was malicious or not.

Two quick examples.

The first: Jenny steals my juice box. Jenny was a moron and didn’t bring anything for lunch to work, so she stole my juice box from the office refrigerator. While I am greatly displeased at this action, as it has taken my sugary, appley goodness away from my lunchtime mastication, I decide to forgive her. Why? 1) Jenny usually lets me eat her Reese’s peanut butter cups because she’s on a diet. 2) I’m not invested in the relationship enough to marry Jenny, but she is my coworker and not forgiving her might cause tension. 3) When I asked who took my juice box, Jenny fessed up, and the offense is trivial comparatively speaking. 4) She didn’t mean anything by it. After weighing the Personality, Relationship Quality, Nature of Transgression, and Social-Cognitive Variables, I decide to forgive her. (But if she does it again, the chick is going down.)

The second: Eric steals my boyfriend. Eric has always been jealous of my boyfriend, and he decides to purposefully lure him away with promises of sex and chocolate, and various combinations of both one would assume. While I admit there is wrong on the part of my boyfriend, I can be quite petty and choose to only focus on how slutty and evil this Eric fellow is. I choose not to forgive him. 1) The move was selfish. 2) I am not heavily invested in keeping the relationship with Eric. 3) I had to find out through a third party and it’s a pretty serious offense. 4) It was totally intentional. After weighing the options, I decide that I am petty and hateful enough to enter into a state of unforgiveness with Eric, deem him a nasty, dirty slut, and move on in bitterness. Suffice it to say, Eric should watch out for both my pitchfork and my evil eye. (Good thing I don’t know any Erics.)

If one does choose the path of forgiveness, however, it goes without saying that there is a final step: reconciliation. Or, rather, the choice of reconciliation. This is possibly the most difficult part in the entire process. This is the true choice. This is the difference between the modern day split of forgiving and forgetting, to use the crudely applied terms. The 2003 study by Konstam et al. that was mentioned earlier states that it is easier to change one’s cognitions - or thoughts - rather than changing one’s affect - or emotions. As we’ve learned, this is the difference between decisional and emotional forgiveness, the difference between superficially moving on and actually doing so. This process has no timeline, and there are innumerable factors that can contribute to the slow and often painful or uncomfortable process of reconciliation. Restitution, appeasement, counseling, history, etc. all play a part in the reconciliation process.

In Criminal Justice, this would be called ‘restoring the victim and offender to the pre-crime state.’ That is deemed the ultimate goal of the justice system. You know that part at the beginning of any action movie where the hero and his bikini model girlfriend/wife are all giggling and happy and life is kinda perfect? Then the terrorists come in or the aliens land or Dennis gets up to his crazy shenanigans again, and that bliss is upended. The point of the entire action movie is that the hero just wants to get back to that first five minutes of the film, where the sun was shining and everyone was smiling and life seemed to be going just fine. Maybe not perfect, but fine. That is reconciliation. That is moving on. And, if one cannot reconcile with the offender, then one at least needs to get to a psychological place of being able to move on.

Jeanne Safer, PhD., says that one doesn’t have to reconcile in order to get the positive effects of forgiveness. Indeed, one can move on emotionally, though it might be harder.

"Many don't have to forgive in order to resolve their feelings," Safer says. "They say, 'I can never feel OK about these terrible things, but I'm not going to be vengeful’…What's important is working it through and achieving resolution, whether it leads to forgiveness or not. Forgiveness involves wishing the other well. You're already there if you don't wish them ill."

I’d like to end this with a personal discussion of forgiveness, if you don’t mind. Leaving the research and academia behind, I’d like to just say that I find forgiveness to be a glossy concept, a photograph that looks so easily put together that one might never notice the thousands of ink dots that are shoved together to create the singular image. If I can get even more personal than usual for a moment - my apologies - I have these scars that I don’t like to discuss, and I have but briefly touched on them before. Most of them come from high school and from growing up as an obviously gay, overly sensitive child with too many questions about religion and an aversion to sports in a Texas town of less than 600 people surrounded by folks who felt sports was a religion and that god was a white guy who told them who to dislike. I had a difficult time making friends, an even harder time trying to find myself in the cacophony, and a harder time still trying not to let the physical and emotional abuses I suffered at the hands of people who were bigger (both in a physical and mental way) than me get so bad that I wanted to end my life. It was hard, and sometimes I dream of showing up to a high school reunion and kicking the collective asses of the guys that made my life hell for 13 years. For the record, in my dream I have Uma Thurman, Kill Bill style kung-fu abilities and an enviable six pack. This is how I know it’s a dream.

I still have dreams that feel so real I am shocked to wake up and not find myself back in my hometown. I relive some of these tortures and situations still. I’ve gone to therapy and I’ve moved on to a point, but I share this to say that there are some scars and some wrongs that one might never truly forgive. I relate to the last bit of research the most, the idea that we can be ok emotionally without the need to give forgiveness to a person or group that has wronged us. I daresay, however, that I am not emotionally whole and that this is invalid for me. I do not believe that if I were truly moved on from the event that I would still relive these nightmares. I believe that this is the grain of the photograph, to continue the metaphor.

This is where one looks close and sees that the photograph isn’t so glossy and perfect, but that it’s this chaotic mass of dots haphazardly strewn across paper. Close examination sees that red and yellow and blue and green and black are just slapped next to each other in groups both large and small in hopes that others think it looks nice.

I understand why it took researchers a long time to want to study forgiveness, because, when it’s left in a realm of religion and ultimately up to the divine, it’s easier to feel human. That is, it’s easier to accept that as human creatures we don’t necessarily ever go back to a pre-crime state. We don’t go back to that first 5 minutes of the action movie, because we can never erase on a cellular level in the memory banks of our brains the most hurtful of wrongs done to us and that we have done to others.

The point of forgiveness, if I may be so bold, is that we try. We try to move on each and every single day, sometimes it’s a moment by moment process. We consciously decide to forgive. We consciously decide to inch ourselves back from the chaos of dots and fix our eyes upon the coalescing of the red, the yellow, the blue, the green, and the black into the formation of the bigger picture.

So, can I forgive someone that does great harm to the innocent? Can I forgive myself, or my high school tormentors? Well, I made it through today, and I’ll work on tomorrow when it gets here. Maybe…just maybe…the magic I was taught as a child, the power of those ancient words, will take hold.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgiveness

Empathy, Selfism, and Coping as Elements of the Psychology of Forgiveness: A Preliminary Study. Varda Konstam , William Holmes , Bethany Levine. 2003

Mea Culpa: a sociology of apology and reconciliation. Nicholas Tavuchis. Stanford University Press. 1991

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_transgression

http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/forgive-forget?print=true

Episode 67: Inciting A Forgiving Riot

2012-02-11T08:53:00.000-06:00

Episode 67 of Inciting A Riot: the Podcast finds us Inciting A Forgiving Riot. I’ll be taking you on my personal and academic search for forgiveness.

News: Scientists define ‘hipster’, Pennsylvania name 2012 ‘Year of the Bible’, Indiana can teach Creationism only if they teach Pastafarianism, Prop 8 & Bill O’Reilly

Word of the Day: Heyday

Sociology: Book Piracy

Gripe Department: Superman Tattoos

Spirituality: An academic search and personal meditation on forgiveness.

Music: Hello - Poe

Please continue to vote for the show on Podcast Alley. Vote, subscribe to, and rate the show on iTunes. Join the TwitterRiot by following me @IncitingARiot. Enter the Swag Contest through a donation on PayPal or purchase of swag through the CafePress.com swag shop. Check out my art on TorchAndPitchfork.Etsy.com. Send any and all feedback to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Home Page: http://www.IncitingARiot.com

Podcast Alley: http://www.podcastalley.com/podcast_details.php?pod_id=86829

Etsy: http://TorchAndPitchfork.Etsy.com

iTunes: http://www.itunes.com/podcast?id=337689333

Twitter: http://twitter.com/IncitingARiot

Swag Shop: http://cafepress.com/IncitingARiot

Project Pagan Enough: http://www.incitingariot.com/p/project-pagan-enough.html

Podcast Powered By Podbean

"Facebook dad shoots laptop"

2012-02-10T15:06:00.000-06:00

Type those words into Google right now, and you'll see stories, blog posts, news articles, and innumerable Facebook and Twitter rants lauding the eponymous dad that shot the laptop. So, what is all the hooplah regarding this dad and the laptop and the shooting? In interest of fairness, here is the entire video:

This man is being called a hero. He is being praised all around the internet as an example of an awesome parent who is really sticking it to his child.

In no particular order, here are my thoughts on the matter:

When you boil everything the man describes down to what actually happened, you get someone who said something rude and immature on Facebook. Person A apparently thought they were just speaking to a set group of people - her friends. Person B found out about the comments, then went on Facebook and decided to humiliate Person A. Both people in this situation are being incredibly petty and immature and not acting in the interests of resolution.
Unfortunately, this isn't just a Person A and Person B scenario. It's a parent and a child. That creates an entirely different psychosocial relationship with very different emotions. Furthermore, the child is 15 and in the throes of adolescence. Saying stupid, immature, asinine things is sort of a given at the age of 15. It's not right, but it's a life lesson every person and parent on the planet goes through.
I am struck with the notion that nobody in the situation was being a parent. The girl acted rudely and without gratitude. The father acted like he was a scorned classmate and blasted her on the internet. The mother condoned the entire thing and asked for a bullet to be shot in her honor.
He mentions that she was grounded for 3 months for venting her teenage frustrations on Facebook. I have to wonder about this. Is the girl not entitled to vent her teenage frustrations to her friends? Does she have to always, under every circumstance, portray the image of the grateful, humble child? It would be nice, but it's not realistic. Must he control her words? What would he do if he found out that she did this same griping at the lunch table? Would he go to the school and burn the offending table?
He acts as though a teenager using curse words is a new thing for him. I would be incredibly interested to hear his conversations with his buddies at the bar. I'm sure they're chaste and pure and totally without curse words. What makes it different? The age? The relationship? Please. Don't act like you're the only parent in the world with a child who never uses language of which you disapprove.
If not for the gun, I would have possibly chuckled, but more at the immaturity of the entire situation. The gun, however, and the whole "now you'll listen to what I have to say" tone to that latter part of the video - FOR ME - turn this whole thing into a pretty malevolent threat. Do I think he's specifically threatening his daughter's life? No. Do I think that it's disturbing that the first thing he wants to do is jump on YouTube and send the message that he likes to shoot things, and do I I also think that it might be intended to come off as a 'don't cross your father' message? Yes.

In a discussion I had on Facebook, I was reminded that we are only given an 8-minute snapshot into these people's lives. That is true. My reactions are based on the video that the father apparently wanted me to see. Me, you, and the rest of the world. In the heat of his anger, he decided to punish his child openly and for all the world to see. He invited the world into his relationship with his daughter. As such, millions upon millions of people now know her, her father, and what she wrote.

Reading through the comments sections, this girl has been called lots of names and gets the privilege of being embarrassed on a worldwide scale. I think this begs a little perspective. The girl posted a message that was seen only by her Facebook friends. He posted a video to YouTube that is being watched by millions. I'm not exactly sure the extreme level of shame he is inflicting on his daughter was merited.

And, again, I go back to the gun. He wanted to ensure his daughter couldn't use her laptop anymore. Why didn't he take out the battery and the power cord? Why didn't he wipe the laptop and force her to donate it to charity? Why didn't he do a number of things, and why was his first reaction to take a gun and shoot the laptop 9 times, specifically making sure the audience knows the gun and bullet type used. He comes off as an overly prideful man who got his feelings hurt by a child and wants to let her know that he can embarrass, shame, and threaten her into submission. The gun, for me, invalidates any legitimacy to whatever argument he may have had.

It is one thing to have taken it out back and used it for target practice. It tells me something completely different that he chose to videotape it and post it online with the intention of ridiculing his daughter on a worldwide stage.

Also, it strikes me as incredibly short-sighted and hypocritical that he creates a child who has few responsibilities and is given what she wants, and then is surprised, upset, and angry when she acts like your typical spoiled teenager. Perhaps if he had taught her the value of a dollar, forced her to pay for part of the offending laptop by taking baby sitting jobs or mowing the lawn, she wouldn't be as ungrateful. Or, perhaps, he should remember the time in which he, too, was a 15-year-old going through hormonal changes that affect your body and emotions in ways science is only beginning to understand.

We were all ungrateful teenagers at one point. This video, however, doesn't strike me as effective. It strikes me as the reaction of a hurt, desperate parent. He actually seems to be enjoying the attention, if you look on his own Facebook profile. Parents around the world might be calling him hero, but I think it seems to be more of a collective revenge fantasy against their children and not a level-headed response.

Before you ask or bring this up, no, I'm not a parent. And I'm not going to say anything about credentials or education, because I'm not sure it matters in situations such as these. I simply feel it's wrong and frightening on a guttural, personal level.

Feel free to share your thoughts, but I have one caution: Don't say something to the effect of "you shouldn't be judging his parenting." He's actually inviting that by posting the video up for all to see. So, the argument there is moot.

*Update* He has posted an update on his Facebook page regarding this business. If you'd like to read it, the link is here. I will say it doesn't change my opinion, and that if I were his daughter, I wouldn't be taking any opportunities to speak out against him either.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

The Sheriff and the Collateral Car Wreck

2012-02-07T23:54:00.001-06:00

On the way home from work, I was witness to what - in the grand scheme - is a minor miscarriage of justice. Sitting at a stoplight, the traffic was flowing steadily in front of me on the cross-street. Suddenly, a sheriff that had been sitting in a nearby gas station parking lot decided to run code (turn his lights and siren on). He rushed out into oncoming traffic, causing a green car to stop short and an SUV to rear end said green car. Seeing this, the sheriff only paused his car and continued on, leaving the drivers to rage and attempt to fix the situation themselves. The situation, mind you, that had been caused by the sheriff. That fled the scene.

Naturally, my first thoughts were of a dual nature (seriously, why wasn't I born a pisces?): On the one hand, I was pissed at the sheriff who was in serious dereliction of protocol and duty. Yet, I was also thinking of the person who might be helped by the officer rushing off to lend aide.

Perhaps two people had to get in that car wreck, where no one was injured, in order for him to to put an end to an instance of domestic violence. There could have been any number of situations requiring speed and momentary carelessness.

Though, I fear the truth was somewhere in the middle. An officer who was in a rush caused an accident and then didn't know what to do, so he fled. Like a teenager who rear ends someone, afraid that daddy will take their license. Except, we bow to the authority of the badge, so we genuflect when we should be pissed and calling headquarters and reporting the problem.

I wonder about this on a spiritual level, though. How often have we been either sheriff or those in the accident? How often do we rush off to do our Very Important Thing, not even pausing to realize that we've ruined someone else's day by our valiant efforts? We remember, vividly, the times when we were the innocent bystanders. Don't we? We count the times and keep mental record of when others left us in their wake of destruction. But, do we do more than pause when we are the cause of the problem?

I think this was my lesson from the universe on this Full Moon. Don't let your reasons, however valiant or necessary to the Greater Good, stop you from acknowledging your mistakes. Yes, there is such thing as a greater good and collateral damage and all that. Unfortunately, as humans, many times that collateral damage has a name and a life and doesn't appreciate having to be your collateral damage.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

The Anti-Bowl (Or: Today I Drew the Hermit Card)

2012-02-05T11:51:00.001-06:00

For someone who supposedly stands between two worlds, who toes the line between this world and that, I have very little spirit. Sure, I get excited about things. I can even get all jazzed about certain events. (The Oscars being Example In Chief here.)

Of Team Spirit, however, I have none. Absolutely none. I think the last time I cared about being on a team was when I was in little league soccer, and that was probably due to it being an intramural league where I didn't have to see any of the kids that went to my school.

In theatre I was always the lead, always carrying the scene on my own. I enjoyed, somewhat, my cast mates (though a good therapist could probably make lots of money off of me figuring out all the angst I have towards some of those folks, namely my director). My big events were always individual. Persuasive Extemporaneous Speaking. Poetry Interpretation. I even did a few writing and literature events. All single.

Ok. Ok... I'll admit it here and now for all the pagany interwebs to know. I was in band. To put it bluntly, I hated it. I hated band camp. I hated the hours of marching. (Yes, there was marching. Yes, there are pictures. No, you will never ever see them.)

My brother, my father, my mother, my uncle - hell, even my slightly estranged sister - were all major team players. Major. Team. Players. My father was on a (pardon the language) fucking Olympic team for track! Seriously! An Olympian! My father! Which is probably why someone in the family had to be the player for a team of one.

As much as I champion seeing both sides of an issue, sports was never anything I was going to see as valuable. Sure, I played when I was younger, and I don't know that anyone would argue that I'm a fairly athletic person... It's not that I have anything against athletes or athleticism... I guess I just don't, and never have, see what all the fuss is about. Why today, the Superbowl, is the biggest event on television in the world. Why?

Gosh, I'm coming off like a grumpus.

I'm not. I swear. Someone told me recently they though I was going to turn into Andy Rooney, noted cantankerous, disgruntled, elderly guy. Today, however, is a day for me to enjoy the things I like to do in peace and quiet. Shopping. Reading. Hell, even working out at the gym is a joy today, because I can use all the best machines, cables, and free weights without the muscle heads lining up in front of me.

I actually had a customer yesterday who asked if our store was closing for today...because...you know...it's the Big Mega Huge Game of Importance! I cocked my head, gave him The Look, and said, "I'm sorry, sir, but contrary to the wishes of most men in America, the Super Bowl is not a national holiday." He dejectedly looked at me and said, "Oh...that's too bad."

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Mark Berndt & a meditation on forgiveness

2012-02-01T23:17:00.000-06:00

Forgiveness, as a concept, is one of the most beautiful evolutionary steps humanity has taken. I get choked up when I see stories of a woman truly forgiving her son's killer. When lovers can forgive the sins of their partners, when estranged friends can put the past behind them, when a reformed racist can be forgiven by those he/she has wronged...it all just does something to me. I weep openly and fully when I see instances of exceptional forgiveness.

And then, there are news stories like this one out of LA. (A warning: this story is exceptionally graphic. Seriously, I physically threw up after reading it.)

Mark Berndt is being held on a $23 million dollar bail for 23 counts, at this point ($1 million for every count, and there are at least 10 more pending), of possibly the most disturbing acts I have ever heard of perpetuated on children. He bound them, blindfolded them, gagged them, fed them his semen (which he did when they were blindfolded, feeding them with a spoon and calling it a tasting game), put cockroaches on them, and photographed everything.

Berndt has had over 30 years of teaching experience. 30 years to, possibly, victimize countless children in this manner. He was caught when he attempted to have some of his nearly 400 photographs processed, and 40 of them were found by a film processor and reported to police. (THANK YOU WHOEVER YOU ARE!) 390 photographs were found in his home like these, and the aforementioned spoon was also found with DNA matching Berndt.

He is facing multiple life sentences.

His victims are all between the ages of 7 and 10.

I would now like to apologize to you, the reader, because I am about to become quite crude. This disgusting piece of shit should roast in the pits of Hell for all eternity. I do not advocate violence, but this is a case where I'm not sure I'd care if they chose the death penalty.

And see, here is my conundrum. When I hear egregious stories like this, where someone's crimes are so extreme and so severe (and especially involving children), I cannot fathom forgiveness. I cannot fathom not only the ability for any of the parents or victims to forgive this guy, but I cannot fathom how deity could possibly forgive such a man. Crimes against the innocent, the defenseless, out of coldness and disease...I just don't understand that level of forgiveness. Because, I want to rage against this man. I want to hate him, and I want to say things like "I hope he burns in Hell" and I want to mean it.

But...at the same time...I'm sitting here crying, because I'm so conflicted. Because of the one simple question, "Doesn't everyone deserve forgiveness?" Shouldn't everyone have that opportunity?

I don't know... I'm not sure that one could atone for this much horror in one lifetime, however. So, I suppose it's times like this when I hope for reincarnation, when I hope that it exists and that someone like this has a few more lifetimes to make it right.

What do you think, Rioters? What do you think of forgiveness and/or this story?

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

The Problem with Titles (Never-ending Politics Edition)

2012-02-01T11:48:00.001-06:00

Watching the coverage of the 2012 American Presidential race, you see a lot of talking heads. Lots and lots of talking heads. People with all sorts of titles and degrees and such going on television to give their expert opinion on why this person or that person is, like, totally awesome. But, when I watch some of these people get on television, I kinda have to wonder why certain folks are introduced in certain ways.

An example: Sarah Palin. Anytime, on any network (despite political affiliation), that she is discussed, she is called Governor Sarah Palin. Typically. It's not Former Governor Sarah Palin or Author Sarah Palin or Fox News correspondent Sarah Palin. It's Governor Sarah Palin. As though she is currently taking time out of her very busy schedule being all gubernatorial to be talked about or interviewed. When, truth be told, she is not actually a governor.

But, the same is said over and over with other people. Newt Gingrich is called 'Mr. Speaker' as though John Boehner doesn't exist. He hasn't been the Speaker of the House since the mid-90s, and the reason he stopped being Speaker is because of gross misconduct and ethics violations. Yet, during debates or political wonks' discussions, there it is, "Mr. Speaker."

Why do we do this?

Why do we allow people to keep their highest achieved rank forever? When I stopped being a court officer, I no longer got any of the privileges the badge provided me. I no longer have the authority to make arrests or write reports or sign my name to legal documents and have it carry any weight. I don't get to be called Officer Fire Lyte. But, I never got to be a Senator or Governor or whatever.

The same is true on the opposite side of the aisle as well. During the 2008 presidential campaign, John Edwards was trying to be the Democratic Party's candidate. He was called Senator John Edwards. But, he hadn't been a Senator in 3 years. He left office in 2005. No longer a Senator by the time he and Clinton and Obama were going at it. So...what's the deal?

In this Rioter's opinion, I think the American people would find it easier to vote for someone if we called them by what they are. That's how the rest of us have to be introduced; why not politicians? If I meet someone at a party and ask what they do for a living, they don't get to say, "Well, I used to be the Dean of the University of [Insert State Here]." They don't get to be introduced as Dean So-and-so if their career ended 20 years ago, and especially not if they were ousted because of ethics violations, like Gingrich, or quit halfway through their contract, like Palin. If you're currently a Starbuck's barista, own it.

Instead of calling Newt Gingrich, "Mr. Speaker", how about we give him the moniker "Mr. Fundraiser" or "Author of Numerous books" Newt Gingrich? Possibly "Guy who keeps trying to swindle money from small businesses under the guise of giving them awards" Newt Gingrich? Governor Romney might not get to be called 'Governor' (as he's been out of office for 5 years - 2007), but we could call him "Guy who's living off the interest of his massive wealth" Mitt Romney.

But, I ask you. Why? Why do folks who leave office, either by choice or scandal, get to keep their titles? They're not theirs any longer. They belong to other people. Sarah Palin does not get to be the Governor of Alaska forever. That would be Sean Parnell who gets to call himself Governor of Alaska. Because he is. Currently.

What do you think? Should people get to keep their titles forever? Why does it apply to folks who hold public office? And, if so, does that mean that Mayors or folks on the City Councils get to keep theirs forever, too? Should we be calling people by what they are, as that is more honest to the American people? Let me know in the comments below!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Movie Review: The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore

2012-01-27T23:25:00.000-06:00

Oscar season is upon us! The nominees have been announced, and many folks are thinking "Huh?! I've never even heard about most of these movies!" It's about this time of year, however, that - because of that very question - I find some of the best movies of the year I would never have heard of otherwise. Por ejemplo: The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore.

This film is about 15 minutes long, and is currently nominated in the Best Animated Short Film category. The plot is fairly straightforward, but after a few views you begin to see several layers to the film. There is a pretty obvious tale of someone discovering the importance of books, and that it is important to continue telling our stories in order to keep them alive. But, then there are several more lessons contained in 15 minutes of Mr. Morris Lessmore.
We are taught that tragedy will come to us all, and that we must rise above and meet it head on in order to survive. We cannot wallow in self-pity or see only the tattered remains of What Might Have Been, missing out on What Could Be.

It is a simple story, filled with the most charming cast of characters and some exceedingly brilliant storytelling. And, yes, by the end of the 15 minutes, I had tears in my eyes. While it is incredibly cliche, I will say, "I laughed. I cried. And, I went into my library and held some of my favorite books close." I love my Kindle. I love technology. But, this movie reminded me of two things:

There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in this world that has ever, does currently, or will ever exist that is as magical, delightful, promising, beautiful, or giving as bound literature. Seeing a typed poem in a book of poetry is far more glorious than reading it off a blog. Smelling the paper in the very middle of a large novel reminds you of the 1st time you discovered that book, and the passion you have for your favorite stories is ignited every single time you smell that smell.
It is imperative that we continue to write our stories down and pass them to future generations. It is of the utmost importance that, when we, too, are carried off to the land beyond, that we have left our children and theirs a bound legacy that goes beyond what you can read in 140 characters or on Wikipedia. Our survival as humans is reliant on storytelling. Yes, humans might continue procreating, but that which makes us human is our imagination, our evolved sense of story.

Suffice it to say, this movie has touched me. You can find the full film below (it's been made available to the public), but I recommend just purchasing the film for yourself. Oh, and I might be able to help you with that. See, if you go to iTunes and look up The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore, you can currently purchase it absolutely free. I'm sure this offer will not be around for long, as the Academy Awards are just around the corner and everyone in the free world will be wanting the film. But, for the time being, you should definitely download your copy while the getting's good.

I fervently believe that in 3-5 years Pixar will be putting out a full-length version of the movie. I can easily see it being a cross between Up, the Wizard of Oz, and the Pagemaster. Here's hoping that the studio makes the right decision and purchases the rights to the feature film!

Hope you enjoy it, and happy Oscar Season!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Introducing: The Pagan Podlist

2012-01-26T20:43:00.001-06:00

Everyday, more people are discovering podcasts. They make us laugh, inform us, and make our house cleaning and daily commutes a bit more fun. But, it's rather difficult to find new pagan podcasts to enjoy. Worse, though, is finding a show and realizing that, while people were raving about how good it was on a message board or another podcast, it hasn't put out any new episodes in 6 months, a year, or more.

Introducing:

The Pagan Podlist!

The Pagan Podlist seeks to provide a simple list of all the currently-producing pagan shows. All shows that appear on The List are checked periodically to ensure that only shows producing new content appear. Hopefully, this resource will help you find new shows and eliminate the frustration of hunting iTunes, Podcast Alley, and social networking sites just to find shows.

If you have a podcast, and you would like to Get Listed, please use the form on the Contact Page. Your show should appear soon!

Feel free to spread the word! The URL is http://www.PaganPodcasts.com. Let your favorite podcaster know they should Get Listed so that other people can enjoy their show, too!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Jaguar Inductees: The Cast of Magic Mike

2012-01-24T10:39:00.001-06:00

There is a movie coming out this movie. It's called Magic Mike. Supposedly, it's loosely based on actor Channing Tatum's origins as a stripper. Since this is a Jaguar induction, however, details don't matter. Supposedly it's a drama. Supposedly it's supposed to be very cool and very edgy. All you need to know is who is in this movie, which will tell you why you'll want to see this movie.

Delightful pics below! Welcome to the Jaguar Club Adam Rodriguez, Joe Manganiello, Alex Pettyfer, Matthew McConaughey, Channing Tatum, and Matt Bomer! Summer can't come soon enough.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

L to R: Joe Manganiello, Matt Bomer (real life gay guy), Channing Tatum, Matthew McConaughey, Alex Pettyfer

Adam Rodriguez (left), Channing, Matt. I've found my exercise motivation for 2012!

Channing & Alex making bow ties look like the best thing EVER!

Joe Manganiello: Werewolf/Stripper/Greek God

Matt Bomer in White Collar.

The Pagan Secret Retrospective (Mea Maxima Culpa Edition)

2012-01-20T18:01:00.000-06:00

August 2009 was the date I published an article called "The Pagan Secret." In November of that same year, it became the second article of mine published on WitchVox.com. To date, it is one of the most-read, most-discussed, most-debated articles I've ever put on the interwebs. And, from time to time, it is rediscovered by someone reading my back catalog of articles, and I'll get an email either praising it as a standing up for tradition or condemning me for my obvious inadequacies, youth, and brash statements.

Today, I received an email from someone that read as follows:

Dear Fire Lyte,

Now that you've created Project Pagan Enough, are you going to ask WitchVox to take down your article titled "The Pagan Secret"? The two are directly contradictory messages.

You can see a discussion of your article--including reactions from me--at:http://wiccan.livejournal.com/1456880.html

Be well,
Ian

I read the discussion regarding the article. I read, when time and inclination permit, a lot of the discussions of my articles when I'm made aware such discussions exist. I'm very glad that my words can spark debate, as that is one of the purposes of the Riot. In this case, though, I'd like to remind everyone of a couple of things:

The article was written in 2008, before the blog and before the podcast.
I was 21 when I wrote that article.

That being said, I cry mea maxima culpa on the article. It's overbroad. It reeks of trying to paint too many subjects with the same brush. The intention I had when I started typing the article and the finished product do not align. I seemed to have worked myself into a tizzy somewhere around paragraph 5, and I was too brash to see it in post-editing. I thought I had this awesome new point, and I thought I was making it.

Some folks over the years have acknowledged that, while my points weren't very finely put, the message of calling out the crazy and creating a spiritual knowledge filter was a good one. And, I appreciate that. But, Ian is correct that that type of message gets very bogged down in the astonishingly self-righteous tone of the article. The notion it seems I was making in this very half-cocked fashion was that we need to run the fake pagans out of our little club and get back to keeping our brand of crazy sacred, untouched, and unmoving.

I would - and have - call bullshit on myself. But, I've done so several times over in the past 3 years on the blog and podcast. I have since come to a more mature understanding that, while education is necessary (and calling bullshit is still a valuable tool), we should not be trying to say our God-in-a-box is better than anyone else's. My brand of crazy isn't any more or less valid than anyone else's. The point I thought I was making at 21 is not the point I ended up making.

The better point, I think, is that if someone calls themselves a Wiccan, the more generic term 'Pagan', a Heathen, or whatever, but they wax poetic about the blood of Christ and going to heaven and washing their sins in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ... Possibly, and this is just me going out on a limb here, someone should come along - instead of sneering at that person, or writing them off as ridiculous - and politely, kindly educate them on the difference between Wicca and Christianity (and that they might not want to give up on the latter just yet).

The thing I've learned is that, it's not the material the road is made of - whether you pave your path with Gardner or Miyazaki or flying spaghetti - it's that you fervently try to get to the divine. The problem of labeling is not a new one, and it's not one that's probably ever going to go away. I recently discussed this in a much better (in my humble opinion) fashion in the article on Zimmelblobs. It might be time that we as a society - Christian, Atheist, Jew, Pagan, Pastafarian, [Insert Brand of Crazy Here] included - stopped being so sensitive to non-inclusion. To labels. If you're claiming to be a fork, but by definition are actually a spoon, don't be upset, because there is a place for you. Being a fork might not be the best fit, but we're all silverware.

I've had a lot of time to reflect on The Pagan Secret. To answer your question, Ian, no. I'm not going to ask anyone to take anything down. There are some sentiments in that article I can agree with, and while I can agree that much of it is bunk at this point, I'm not going to try and hide it like I never made it happen. I think that being the founder of Project Pagan Enough and being the guy that also wrote The Pagan Secret doesn't have to be a mutually exclusive thing. There are 33 articles of mine posted on Witch Vox, each one a sign of my growth and understanding of magic, life, the pagan community, Spirit, and myself. I have since clarified many of those statements with much better logic and research in other articles, and I've since negated many of those statements with much better logic and research. I encourage you and others to examine all of those articles, as well as the nearly 700 written on this blog, and the hundreds more created for my podcast.

Ian ended his email with a quote attributed to Walt Whitman in "Song of Myself":

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)

I think that's a good place to end this retrospective. Share any thoughts you have in the comments section below.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Episode 66: Inciting A Changing Riot

2012-01-19T23:15:00.001-06:00

Episode 66 of Inciting A Riot: the Podcast finds us Inciting A Changing Riot! We’ll be talking about some changes coming to the Riot, looking at a refocusing and recommitment to the purpose of the show and blog.

News: HIV+ Student denied admission, Afghan woman must marry her rapist, Homeland Security Sno-Cones, Iran has our spy drone, the mouse in Mt. Dew, Witch Killing, 2^nd Earth

Word of the Day: Parochial

Gripe Department: The Top 17 Things to Leave in 2011

Music: Shake It Out - Florence + the Machine

Spirituality: Times they are a-changin’ at the Riot, and the Chief Rioter in charge is changing with them. Also, if you listen carefully, you might hear Fire Lyte apologize.

Poetry: How to write a political poem - Taylor Mali (from the book The Spoken Word Revolution)

Please continue to vote for the show on Podcast Alley. Vote, subscribe to, and rate the show on iTunes. Join the TwitterRiot by following me @IncitingARiot. Enter the Swag Contest through a donation on PayPal or purchase of swag through the CafePress.com swag shop. Check out my art on FireLyte.Etsy.com. Send any and all feedback to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Home Page: http://www.IncitingARiot.com

Podcast Alley: http://www.podcastalley.com/podcast_details.php?pod_id=86829

Etsy: http://FireLyte.Etsy.com

iTunes: http://www.itunes.com/podcast?id=337689333

Twitter: http://twitter.com/IncitingARiot

Swag Shop: http://cafepress.com/IncitingARiot

Project Pagan Enough: http://www.incitingariot.com/p/project-pagan-enough.html

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Understanding SOPA & PIPA (from New Left Media)

2012-01-19T09:41:00.000-06:00

Okay, so you've heard about SOPA and PIPA, right? Yesterday, Wikipedia was blacked out for 24 hours in protest of the proposed legislation. Twitter and Facebook were abuzz with talks of SOPA. (In the pagan community, I've even seen a boycott of Cat Yronwode and Lucky Mojo, because she and her business support SOPA and PIPA.)

But, what is it? I mean, if you've very carefully followed the news - attempting to sift through all the massive quantities of spin attached to the reporting - and read all the articles and discussed it with someone who can translate legalese, then you probably know, but what about everyone else? The problem with legislation such as this is that it is written in language few people speak (the aforementioned legalese), and then it is boiled down to a sound bite that is then fed to the public. What sound bite you ask?

SOPA/PIPA are designed to stop online piracy.

This legislation is protecting copyright.

This legislation would stop the unlawful spread of someone else's copyrighted material.

If you're lucky, you've heard the part about making sure authors/musicians/artists get paid for their work, instead of it becoming a free source online. To a normal person, this sounds like the issue of book piracy we were just discussing, right? Except, that's not really what the law is set out to do.

SOPA and PIPA are designed to either block an entire website from being accessed, or to stop payments going to a website should it be deemed they are using copyrighted material. On the surface this sounds like the elimination of sites like Pirate Bay or programs like Limewire that allow free filesharing of movies, music, pictures, and pretty much anything else one can upload. Sounds good, right?

But, what if a blogger using the Blogspot domain posts a piece of copyrighted material? The legislation deems that all of Blogspot - including this blog - could be deemed inaccessible. At least, through conventional means.

This legislation also doesn't take into account the understanding of Fair Use, which allows the republishing of copyrighted material under certain circumstances.

Now, I could spend all day trying to boil down SOPA and PIPA, but I would just like to instead say this: Fire Lyte and Inciting A Riot's various media projects stand with the protests against SOPA and PIPA. While piracy is a bad thing, this much of an overreach is obscene and a step in a very bad, very dark direction for the United States. But, don't take my word for it. Below is a video from the massively excellent New Left Media. (You've heard me talk about them before.) It explains, in terms everyone can understand, exactly what PIPA and SOPA are, and the full scope of their legislation. It dispels the myths and talking points, and gives you the meat of the issue.

Enjoy.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

SOPA Musical Interlude

2012-01-18T10:20:00.001-06:00

While we're getting a taste of what life might be like without certain amenities (chief amongst them Wikipedia, incidentally, that's the only working link on Wikipedia today) due to the major protest against SOPA, I thought I'd put together a delightful playlist for us to listen to while we wait for the internet to come back. Many of these are new artists I'm just discovering.

Side note: I am including a new song by artist Lana Del Rey. Yes, I heard her sing live. Yes, she is absolutely, unbelievably dreadful live. That does not change the fact that the song, as is, is pretty freaking awesome.

See you on the other side of SOPA!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Quick Correction: An Altar to Homophones

2012-01-12T22:05:00.000-06:00

Quick lesson: Grammar is full of fun and interesting things. One of those crazy, cool, interesting things is called a 'Homophone'. A homophone is not a phone that likes other phones, it describes a set of words that sound exactly alike yet mean different things.

Examples:

Pause | Paws
Flea | Flee
Rack | Wrack
Wear | Where

Get it?

Here's where it gets FUN!

In the pagan community, our delightful group of folks that loves to correct and re-correct and prove wrong and disprove the proving wrong and point fingers (basically we all like to be really, really RIGHT) I cannot HELP but knock my head against a wall every time I see the following:

The alter to my deity...

We prayed at the alter.

Or... Something like that. Folks, your friendly neighborhood Rioter is here to inform and enlighten. So, I'd like to inform you...

THE WORD IS ALTAR! AL-TAR. WITH AN -AR! NOT ALTER. ALTAR. YOU ALTER A DRESS. YOU PRAY AT AN ALTAR!

I hope we've all learned something today.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Follow Up on Book Piracy

2012-01-09T16:34:00.001-06:00

I've been pondering about the actual cost of publishing, since I wrote the last blog post. In fact, going back through some of the blog posts and over at Llewellyn.com, I've come to notice a few things. Some points I'd like to correct - hey, I can admit when I'm wrong - and others I'd like to clarify or reaffirm.

One of the first points is the cost of a book. Why do books cost as much as they do? I will admit, when I came up with my number, I was basing it off the cost of a CD back when I worked for the big box electronics retailer with the blue polos and yellow tags. Books are a different beast. A really wonderful New York Times article broke it down really well. Here, they even provide graphics!

So how much does it cost to actually print a book?

Conglomerate estimates say about $3.25 (which includes storing and shipping the books after you've printed them. This leads us to assume, naturally, that printing a book actually might be in that $1-$2 range). A quick breakdown of the other numbers you're seeing. Design, typesetting, and editing. These are the "formatting" parts of a book. Choosing the font, paying an editor, laying out the book, etc. You also see marketing. This is done for all books in all formats. Also, the 'Author's royalty' is based on a percentage. If the publisher got $50 per book, the author would get a lot more. If the publisher got $5 per book, the author would get a lot less. (This can lend itself to the argument for self-publishing or digital rights for authors, which would increase the author's profits significantly. Many new or non-Stephen King-level authors do not make a living off of their books. In fact, they typically don't make much at all.)

The article states that if a publisher has, say, Barnes & Noble sell a new hardback book for them at $26, the publisher gets about half of that ($13). Of that half, about $9 goes to pay fees, and about $4 is profit. However, the article is quick to note that final profit is even less per book, because that profit goes to pay the cost of overhead for the publisher. You know, silly things like paying the people that work for the publishing company, keeping the lights on, renting office space, and so on.

What the article does point out is that it is more profitable for publishing companies to produce e-books, because there are no printing, storing, or shipping fees associated with the book. Yes, you're still paying for editors and typesetting and marketing and royalties and such, but you're not paying about half of the cost of the physical book.

For e-books priced at $10, the publisher gets $7. That's a heck of a lot better, strictly speaking in percentages, from 50% of a hardback. Also, the cost of producing the e-book goes from $9, to between $2.73 and $3.48. The publisher is getting a much higher profit margin off of e-books than off of physical books. So, there, I was wrong. An electronic book wouldn't cost $1 to produce. It would cost about $3. My mistake.

And, yes, $4-$6 per book profit doesn't sound like a lot. Consider, however, that publishers aren't just selling 5 or 10 copies of the book. They're selling thousands, sometimes millions of copies. If you just sold 100 e-books at $4 profit, you're making $400 profit. Several years ago, Llewellyn came out with a new edition of Cunningham's Wicca: A guide... . The cover proudly stated that they've sold over 400,000 copies. At $4 profit, that's $1.6 million from just that one Cunningham book alone. Go Llewellyn! Who says pagan businesses can't be profitable, huh? Of course, given the e-book craze, and how they are starting to outpace physical books, Llewellyn could be looking at an average profit of $5 per book sold. (So, for the next 400k sales, they stand to make around $2 million. Not too shabby for a book that was published in 1989 and is still one of their most popular sellers.)

See, some perspective is nice, huh?

Then, I've seen the argument pop up that "information should be free". Folks, nothing is free. The creator of that information has to eat, too, and if they're trying to make a living as an author, your hippy, free-love, share the information mentality is doing nothing but taking food out of their pockets and coins out of their coffers. Sharing a book with a friend or making a digital copy for yourself is completely different than actively promoting the free dissemination of an author's work.

We only stand to lose great potential authors, because being a writer isn't a lucrative career path. It's difficult enough getting your footing without knowing anyone with a scanner and an internet connection can take your book and give it away for free. If you would like a "free source of information", then head over to Wikipedia, which allows you to look up all the information you want for free. If you are choosing to pick up a book, however, you should be choosing to pay that author for their perspective, their story.

Also, and this is the last thing, I swear, the Llewellyn blogger seems to not know how to use Amazon. Many commenters to her blog post keep bringing up the point that e-books are sometimes more expensive than paperback versions of the same book, a fact which she seemed completely oblivious to. I did a great deal of perusing of the Amazon site, and noticed something. No Llewellyn publication costs more in Kindle form than in physical form. So, score 1 for Llewellyn blogger lady. However, what I noticed time and again is that the physical copy of the book is maybe $0.50-$0.80 more. They're nearly identical in price.

Given what we now know about profit margins and the actual cost of a book, I wonder what the next excuse will be as to why the cost of the e-book can't come down just a smidgeon.

Just some updates on this ongoing conversation. Keep those comments coming! This really is a very interesting topic.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

The Outrageous Cost (a note about copyright infringement and where publishers go from here)

2012-01-08T17:58:00.000-06:00

Last week a website became the target of a number of pagan bloggers, because it was supplying links to downloadable PDF copies of many big name pagan books. For free. The great and mighty Llewellyn Publications itself actually descended from on high to raise Cain, as it were, to protect their copyrights and the rights of their authors. Apparently, the website had been a repeat offender for publishing copyrighted material for anyone to download.

Copyright infringement is bad. It is. If you download a movie, song, book, program, etc. without paying for it, then you've committed copyright infringement. You've, basically, stolen from all the people who put time, money, and effort into producing that good.

This being said, I understand that the internet provides exceedingly murky territory for what is and what is not ok to republish. Copyright infringement on music isn't the same as books which isn't the same as programs, etc. And, all you have to do is head over to Google and type in "[name of thing you want]+free" and you'll usually find it on the first page. Does it make it right? No. Easy, yes, but not right.

The articles I've written and posted to this website and to WitchVox.com are copied and reposted all around the web. Before I published the article on Zimmelblobs, I typed the word into Google...you know...for fun. There were zero results. It was a new word, as far as Google was concerned. Then, I published my article, and all of a sudden there are 11,200 results. (I just checked.) Now, I know I didn't publish it 11,200 times around the web. I posted it approximately twice. And yet, there it is. Posted in its entirety on message boards, other blogs, personal websites, etc. Blogger after blogger expresses the same exasperation at this, putting their work out there only for a quick copy/paste to turn it into someone's attempt to pass it off as their original idea.

Though, 11,200. I didn't realize you guys liked me that much. :-)

But, this whole dirty business has gotten me to thinking. I've had a number of conversations with friends over the past few years about books, and about their future. It's not just me, a lot of people have been having these conversations. Newsmakers. Technology pioneers. Authors. Publishers. Lots of people have been having the conversation about books, and about their future. Newspapers are rapidly disappearing all around the country, replaced with CNN twitter feeds and NYTimes apps. The news culture is in a never before seen 24-hour cycle, with everyone wanting to obtain as much of the information as possible for absolutely no cost to them. Nobody wants a paper, because they just pile up, and you have to search through all the other articles to find the good stuff. Right...?

We're facing a fact, in 2012, that some print media is going by the wayside. But, we've known for quite a number of years that physical media in general is suffering. We saw this first with the case of Napster making music free to download by anyone with a 56k modem and a lot of time to wait on the download to go through. Other file sharing services popped up and went away, some attempting legitimacy after being sued while others dissipated altogether. With more and more people having high speed internet in their homes, however, the ability to download that move or that song is becoming easier and easier. Just hope you don't get caught.

But, a few years ago, the music industry wised up. iTunes happened. It became even easier to download your music, because you could do it from your iPhone for a very small fee. It's working out very well for the music industry. For the last couple of years, music sales are finally back on the rise, when they had been ebbing for quite some time.

Something else has happened, though, over the last several years. Kindles, iPads, tablets, e-readers, they've all begun to dominate the market. Millions upon millions of these things are sold every month! It's becoming just as easy to get a book. Pull out your phone, your Kindle, your whatever, and click BUY. You'll have it in a matter of seconds, again, for a nominal fee. Great, right?

Except that this mobile media revolution has gotten people wanting all their movies, their music, their books available to them all the time. Movie manufacturers realized that the big new draw would be the Digital Copy. Both DVD and BluRay movies are now coming with an extra disc that will allow you to download a digital version of the movie that you purchased directly to your computer, which you can then put on all those smart phones and tablets, carrying your media with you at all times.

Book publishers, though, are in a unique problem. How do you improve on the book? Well, I think Llewellyn and other publishers could - and should - take lessons from the other media sources.

Allow digital copies. This would be a really easy way for publishers to extend the life of the book. If you choose to purchase a book, then, perhaps, you get a code to download the ebook version onto your Kindle (or ereader of choice).
Make some books into apps. I have said for some time now that Llewellyn and other similar publishers are losing out BIG TIME by not making their almanacs into apps that integrate with your smart phone. More than an ebook, these apps could add the calendars included in the books directly into your smart phone's calendar as well as the one on your desktop. I know that I would like to purchase some of these almanacs, but they're a bit pricy for something that is just going to be obsolete in a few months. And, while some of the articles are nice, many of them are already published online in places like Llewellyn's blog or Witch Vox for free.
Someone. Somewhere. Create a viable Netflix for books. I've heard that there are services online touting themselves as a Netflix for books, basically an online library where you can 'rent' books and then return them for the next one on your queue. None of them seem to be getting anywhere near the attention they need in order to survive, to become viable. I think this could, for starters, be done on a publisher-by-publisher basis. Except, with the book companies, you could include the option to purchase the book if you utterly fall in love with it. Perhaps if you could pay $5/month or $10/month for unlimited book reading capability, people would be less inclined to search out pirated copies of books online.
At least create an ebook library. Many ereaders now have the ability to check books out from various libraries. Religious texts - like what Llewellyn produces - are the most stolen books from libraries. I realize lending out media comes with high risk of things being stolen, but perhaps Llewellyn would consider opening their catalogue up for ebook lending.
Make buying the ebook a good value! If you go to Amazon, for example, and look up a book, you'll notice that all of the format options are listed for that book, as well as their prices. You'll see, for example, that you can buy Dorothy Morrison's The Craft for $11 in paperback and for $10 on Kindle. One of the big arguments from producers of media (whether it be a movie, a book, a song, what have you) is that when you download illegally, you're taking away from all the people that work to make that media a reality.

Here's where I digress... From working in retail, I know a thing or seven about mark-ups. It might cost a big box store $2 or $3 or even less to buy a DVD or a Book or something. But, then, they turn around and sell it for $10 or $15 or $20. Whatever they can reasonably charge, whatever they've convinced people is a good value. So, then, imagine my puzzlement at why e-books are now starting to cost almost as much as the physical copy of the book. When you're buying from something like Amazon, you're not paying for a physical storefront. You're not paying for a lot of things. Much of the overhead cost of running a big box store, like what Amazon could be considered to be, is eliminated by the dint of it being an online business. Take away the cost of the paper the book is printed on, the ink used to do the printing, the machines having to be purchased for the production of the book, and what is left? How much is the true cost of that e-book?

$1?

Less?

I've actually seen cases where the e-book is more expensive than the paperback. Seriously, what is up with that?

Many commentators have been talking about the rising costs of ebooks due to publishers' griping that a bestselling ebook was coming out at $10 maximum, undercutting the physical book's price by half in many cases, sometimes a little more or less. Now, while you still get a better deal buying the ebook, it is not by much. You might save a dollar or three, which sort of deflates the whole notion of the ebook as a cheaper alternative.

Copyright infringement is a terrible thing. Sometimes, though, it takes a terrible thing to push us forward. Perhaps book sellers and book publishers like Llewellyn can take this as a wake up call, while they're getting duly offended. There will always be thieves, but, perhaps, we can make it easier for the general consumer to obtain literature, and make stealing that media less appealing.

I for one would love to be able to go to Llewellyn's website, enter in my UPC's for the physical books I legally purchased, and download a copy for my Kindle.

Here's hoping publishers find a way to innovate their products, and that folks learn the lesson about posting up someone else's hard work for all to steal.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte