The Current State of Things

Tags

, ,

I lost my job about a month ago.  Some expected developments with the company that would have allowed me to be promoted to a different position didn’t develop, and I was doing a job below my level… but being paid at the level I would have been with a more responsible position.  That’s a very expensive holding pattern to be in, and the decision was made to let me go rather than keep the situation static.

Am I happy about this?  No, I am not… but neither am I very upset.  When I lost my job in Peterborough back in 2015, I was devastated; when I lost this job I was more annoyed about the loss of the paycheque than anything else.  The truth is, I was working fourteen and sixteen hour days, four or five days a week, not to mention driving an average of 250 miles every day, my personal life was on hold and it was getting hard on my family.  Now I’m looking for work again… and I’m going to put some hard boundaries on work/life balance, and I’m going to do it from day one.

A job should be is something you do to live; it’s not the purpose of life.  My now-former boss seems to thrive on doing the 24/7 work thing, which is probably why he’s a successful businessman.  I personally can live with not being a successful businessman so long as I’m happier than I’ve been this last year.  Yes, I enjoyed the challenge of the job, but the constant unrelenting pace was beginning to take it’s toll on me, and I’m sure that influenced my employer’s decision to let me go.

In any case, that’s done.  I’ve updated my resume and I’m actively looking for work.  In the meantime my wife’s RMT practice is going well and we’re not going to starve in the foreseeable future.

With my now-abundant free time I’m getting back into the SCA.  Aside from going to the occasional event to see friends, we really haven’t been much involved with the local group since we moved down here.  I’m hoping that will change.  I’ve also decided to get back into fighting, which means I’ve got to fix my armour.   My current fighting kit, while it looks good, is somewhat lacking in certain things… like a proper fit.  And when you’re running around in a field in fifty pounds of plate steel, fit matters; things shift and slide, which makes things pinch and bruise.  I’m currently re-vamping straps and points and my wife is making me a proper pourpoint (or “arming doublet”, to use the Victorian phrase) because the kidney belt-and-suspenders rig for my leg support just wasn’t working; which means that I need to replace the crappy kidney belt with something that will actually protect my kidneys and spine (both things I would prefer to remain undamaged); which means that I need to revamp my torso protection; which means I need to make something that looks good;  which means that I also need to sort out the rust issues on my mild-steel kit; which means I need more shop space; which means I need to reorganize the garage… and so on, ad infinitum.

Suffice to say that even without a job my summer has been busy.  We’ve installed a new pell in the backyard (somewhat better-padded than the one at the old house) and I’ve been doing 20-30 minutes of pellwork most mornings, despite the record-breaking heat this summer.  Sixteen hours a day in a suit on the road or in boardrooms wasn’t particularly good for my endurance, so I’m working hard to get myself back into shape and lose weight.  I’ve physically got everything I need for the armor project, so I’ve been making inroads there, and since I splurged a bit and bought myself some new hourglass gauntlets to complete my kit, I’m very motivated to finish the armor project so I can get out there and try the new gauntlets.

We’re not going to Pennsic this year — there’s just no budget for it, and to be frank I’m a bit leery about traveling to the United States what with all the tensions between Canada and the US.  I’ll spend August getting things together and — hopefully — finding a job, then with any luck I’ll be out to our local fight practices when they start up in the fall.

Advertisements

A Better, More Consciously Inclusive Society

Tags

I just read Ken Mondschein’s very fair and balanced article examining the now-infamous “Caid Swastika Incident” which happened in the SCA earlier this year. It lays out what happened, how people reacted, whether there was deliberate ill-intent and what the SCA needs to reflect on going forward.

Long story short, the Kingdom of Caid crowned their new king and queen, who wore garb with hand-woven trim that clearly displayed swastikas and double-H runes, which of course are symbols closely associated with both original-issue Nazism and the currently resurgent neo-Nazi/Alt-Right iterations. There was considerable uproar over the issue, a non-apology-apology, followed by a couple of much more sincere apologies, and in the end the offending royals abdicated.

The trim in question is based on a medieval original, which the article includes pictures of.   The original (and the replica) obviously took a high order of skill to weave and is an impressive technical and artistic achievement.

It’s also a bunch of swastikas and symbols associated with the words “Heil Hitler.” So that’s a big fucking problem right there. Obviously the original wasn’t freighted with the negative associations (although the Nazis apparently coveted the “Snartemo V band” as an example of “pure aryan art”) but the replica absolutely is freighted with those things. Someone deliberately set out to reproduce that item and sew it to coronation garb for the King and Queen of Caid;  accurate medieval reproduction or not, it sends a nasty, nasty message to Jews, LGBTQ people and people of colour in the SCA.

Was it an a deliberately intended message? That’s the million-dollar question, of course, but even if there was no deliberate intent to associate the SCA with Nazi imagery, even a complete freaking potato should have realized that this was going to be a serious problem.  Even if it was innocently (if cluelessly) done, the profound failure of judgment involved definitely required the royals in question to apologize and step down.

And if there was a deliberate intent to express a support of Nazi or alt-Right ideals, even if only as a juvenile attempt at trolling, then those responsible need to be R&D’d immediately.

Those are decisions that are going to need to be made at a much higher level than where I’m at, of course. But those decisions are going to have to be made.

It needs to be said:  The SCA, as much as I love it, has not always been as welcoming a place to minorities as it could be, especially to LGBTQ people. One of my own most personal and painful experiences with the SCA’s profound flaws is something I rarely share: I was once told by a member of the Chivalry — entirely kindly, as friendly and well-meaning advice — that I shouldn’t let people know about my sexuality since “gay guys don’t get Knighted.”

I cannot begin to express how much that hurt.

And again, in 2012, when the SCA decided to change the rules to allow for same-gender consorts in Crown Tourney, the BoD of the day prevaricated and eventually passed down a half-assed decision leaving it to the sitting Kings and Queens of the day rather than taking the stand of a clear statement of LGBTQ equality in the Society.  I said it then in a Facebook post and I’ll say it again now: However well-intentioned those sitting the Thrones may be in the future, LGBTQ players will be going to the Crown with our hats in hand twice a year… and I’m less than impressed about being given permission to beg.

The SCA has its flaws. And one of its great flaws – indeed, perhaps it’s greatest flaw — is that SCAdians will tolerate any level of injustice and unfairness in order to preserve their hobby.

Well… not any level. Not anymore. Because clearly, in Caid, there’s been a demonstration that there is a level that people won’t tolerate, a hard line that people won’t cross. (I wish we’d found that line a lot earlier, but that’s for a different post.) And the Caid Swaztika Incident has opened a can of worms that can’t be closed… nor should it be. There’s no way to sweep this under the rug, and any attempt to do so would ultimately destroy the Society, because people would just start drifting away. No matter how accepting and well-intentioned the majority of people in the SCA might be, the knowledge that such behavior was permitted and allowed to pass officially unchallenged would undermine the credibility of the organization itself.  It would, and I am saying this with no hyperbole whatsoever, kill the Dream.

Something ugly has been revealed in our game and we need to lance that boil and drain the poison or we risk losing the patient. The uproar over this issue needs to be heard. It needs to be listened to. And ultimately, it needs to be learned from, no matter how uncomfortable that conversation is going to be in the short-term.

In the end, the author of the piece that I linked to at the beginning of the post, Ken Mondschein, came to a conclusion that I wholeheartedly support: “Let us hope … that the result of the fierce conversation happening in the SCA leads it into becoming a better, more consciously inclusive place.

Yes.  This.

It’s time.

I Am Done Saying “Not All Christians”

Tags

This morning I ran across the news about noted anti-LGBTQ evangelical Christian activist Tony Perkins’ giving Donald Trump “a do-over”. Apparently Christians are fine with his adultery, his greed, his venality and his obscenity because he’s the kind of leader that America needs to “stand up to bullies like Obama.”

In disgust, I shared the story on Facebook with the Mirriam-Webster definition of Hyprocrite. 1: A person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion. Then I added a statement which is becoming increasingly true for me: This is why I cannot respect Christians.

A friend commented on my post in that I “shouldn’t lump all Christians into the same pile.” To be frank, I was expecting that response from somebody, because there’s always that response from somebody, it’s just a question of which of the Christians I know who would respond first. And you know what? I’m so damn tired of hearing it. I’m tired of links to articles about Christians who signed a petition (or whatever) and then patted themselves on the back about it. I’m certainly tired of being told to calm down.

So I replied: Sorry, but I am done saying “Not all Christians.” This guy is representing all Christians because he says he does and no one – no oneis standing up and saying otherwise. This is the face of Christianity.

Because increasingly, in this Age of Trump, bigots like Tony Perkins really are the public face of Christianity. They don’t have any compunctions about using their influence, their stature and their bully pulpit to pound on LGBTQ people or Muslims or women, or whomever it suits their purpose to bully for the sake of fat envelopes in the collections plate. And I don’t see very many – or even very few — of their coreligionists standing up and saying “Hey wait a minute, that doesn’t represent me.” And even when they do stand up they’ll spend endless amounts of time and effort claiming that they’re not the problem without ever addressing the actual problem – that a bunch of bigots have hijacked their religion and are using it to literally murder queer people.

Yeah, intellectually I can see the argument that Perkins – and other scum-suckers like him — don’t really speak for all Christians, however much they like to give the impression they do. But that’s the impression they’re able to project because moderate Christians don’t speak up.

I’ve said it before on this blog, and I’ll say it again: Moderate and progressive Christians need to stand up to these fanatics.

And they don’t. They won’t. The last time I raised this issue on my blog, I had a Christian acquaintance argue with me that, not to minimize my argument but as important as it might seem to me, it “really isn’t on our radar.” The implication, of course, is that since it didn’t effect them personally, they should be excused from having to give a shit about the bigotry and hate being perpetrated on innocent people in their names. That they don’t have to care that their religion, their holy book, and their so-called saviour are being used as weapons to marginalize LGBTQ people, to strip us of our rights and to line the pockets of the con-men doing the stripping.

And what really blew me away was how offended they were that I’d call them on it.

I’m done. I am fucking done cutting so-called Christians slack and giving them the benefit of the goddamn doubt. It’s 2018 and evangelical Christians are rapidly becoming the cornerstone holding up the corrupt, racist and homophobic Trump administration. They are selling the soul of the Christian religion for political influence and the vast majority of Christians are letting them do it because… well, I actually don’t know why. Greed, maybe? They just don’t want to rock the boat? It isn’t worth it to them to stick their necks out for a bunch of perverts and deviants?

I’ve stopped caring about why they’re failing. And I’ve stopped caring that their feelings might be hurt that I’m furious about it.

Every Christian who thinks I’m a lesser person, not entitled to the same rights and protections as them because I was born bisexual, is my enemy. And every so-called Christian who is such a coward and a hypocrite that they refuse to denounce their bigoted coreligionists is also my enemy. By refusing to stand up, they are allowing the bigots free reign. Period. No excuses, no justifications, no rationalizations. No “they aren’t really Christians” demurrals, as though those fucking work. Christians as a whole have allowed the bigots to take up the mantle of Christian moral rectitude and in so doing have proven that Christianity is nothing but a shuck-and-jive, a confidence game, and a self-righteous swindle.

Am I doing a disservice to moderate and progressive Christians?

Probably. I’m sure they think so.

But fuck them anyway: I don’t see moderate Christians on the news. I don’t see moderate Christians making any changes. I certainly don’t see moderate Christians pushing the bigots out of their allegedly inclusive Christian communities. I only see smug bigoted scum like Tony Perkins getting richer and more influential and claiming to speak for all Christians and not being contradicted.

And I see the news articles about the hate aimed at LGBTQ people. I see those every day.

Every. Goddamned. Day.

As an LGBTQ person, I am sick to my fucking stomach of waiting for moderate Christians to grow a pair, to get woke, to stand up to the bigots. We are under attack. Queer people are dying, literally dying, and Christians are saying it “really isn’t on our radar.” They can’t be bothered.  They’re comfortable in their privilege.  They’re just fine with letting LGBTQ folks have our rights trampled, our lives marginalized and our deaths ignored.

There’s no middle ground here. I don’t have the privilege of turning a blind eye, because where I stand the sides are brutally clear-cut: you’re either with the queers or you’re with the bigots. And I don’t see a whole lot of Christians standing up with the queers.

So this is a call-out for Christians: Prove it. Prove to me that not all Christians are bigots. And I don’t mean send me links to internet articles showing how a bunch of other Christians did “something” to prove I’m wrong, I mean fucking do something yourself. Call out a bigot in your faith community. March in a Pride parade with a sign that clearly identifies you as a Christian. Write an op-ed in your parish newsletter. Send a letter to the Pope.

Pick a side, stand up and take action.

And just because I’m pissing people off today, I’m also going on record with this statement: I sincerely doubt any of the so-called Christians who read this are going to do a goddamn thing. Or at least a goddamn thing more difficult or introspective than denouncing me as the bigot for writing this piece and unfriending me in a huff.

 

Update: 24 January
“I sincerely doubt any of the so-called Christians who read this are going to do a goddamn thing. Or at least a goddamn thing more difficult or introspective than denouncing me as the bigot for writing this piece and unfriending me in a huff.”

Called it.

Update: 30 January
It’s gratifying to know that — despite the personal consequences of me saying this — I’m not the only person who has made this statement.

Citing Scripture

Tags

,

Over the last couple of days my wife has run afoul of a grimly serious Christian on Facebook. It started when a friend of ours posted a biblical quote: Deuteronomy 23:12-13 “Thou shalt have a place also without the camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad: And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee.”

It was a bit of poop humour, to be honest, although I made the point in a comment that this sort of basic sanitation would have been a very practical thing for an army in the field.

And then this self-identified Christian chimed in, rudely demanding to know “What bible did you get this from?” and telling us to “Read the truth in the Holy Bible.”

Umm… Yeah. This is from the bible. King James version, and my friend had provided chapter and verse. When this fact was pointed out, the Christian replied, flatly, that we should “Be carefull (sic) of what you say, God will not be mocked.”

Sigh.

It was at this point that my wife jumped into the conversation, rebuking this person for trying to censor our conversation, and for trying to do so with biblical threats when it was clear that she wasn’t even aware of the existence of the original passage (pun not intended) and perhaps she should study her religious texts before coming down on others.

So the Christian responded by repeating “God will not be mocked” and providing the biblical chapter and verse that phrase comes from “Galations 6-7”. Except, of course, it’s actually spelled “Galatians”, being St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, the ninth book of the New Testament. So I corrected her spelling with, I must admit, a certain amount of glee. (My wife pointed out that the passage in fact refers to hypocrisy, not blasphemy, and called her out on her error.)

And then this Christian lady advised us that we should take a biblical study course, because we “might learn something.” I managed to refrain of asking whether the lessons might include the correct spelling of the books in question. I could not, however, refrain from asking her what the course had to say about Luke 6:42. (“How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”)

This entire conversation actually comes to the root of the problem I have with organized religion – especially the kind of Christianity I was brought up in.  I was raised in a devoutly Catholic family, so I know my bible, okay? Not line-for-line, but I’ve got a good grasp of the broad strokes. I knew, for example, when my friend shared the original passage from Deuteronomy that it involved the Deuteronomic Code, a collection of Hebrew laws pertaining to ritual cleanliness and purity. It makes sense – both practically and spiritually – not to shit where you sleep, but to go outside the camp, dig a hole, and then cover everything up afterwards. I don’t know if the following line – Deuteronomy 12:14 “For the Lord your God moves about in your camp to protect you and to deliver your enemies to you. Your camp must be holy, so that he will not see among you anything indecent and turn away from you.” — is scientifically correct, but I’d imagine that “not dying of dysentery” could have been interpreted as a sign of divine favour.

My problem with organized religion is this: You can make scripture say whatever it is you want it to say. When you have a text as old and convoluted as the bible – the product of thousands of years of Jewish law, scholarship and interpretation capped with centuries of Christian philosophy and correspondence, all of which has just sort of accrued over time into an enormous collection of documents, it ends up being self-contradictory, often to the point of being nonsensical.

Add in a variety of translation issues — especially the multiple linguistic shifts from Hebrew and Aramaic to Greek, then to Latin and on to Tudor-era English —and you have a real problem with textual accuracy, especially as regards the King James Version of the bible. As a linguistic artifact the bible is absolutely fascinating, but as a guide on how to treat other people it can often be severely problematic. Especially if you like to cherry-pick scripture to support your opinions and preconceptions.

Which – mea culpa – is exactly what I did.

Using my knowledge of both the bible and Google search, I was able to pick and choose passages that supported my point and undermined my opponent. It was amusing, yes, and kind of fun to hoist this humourless person on their own petard (which is a Shakespearean reference, not a biblical one) but it really does illustrate the point that blindly adhering to the minutia of a religious text rather than embracing a positive, life-affirming philosophy rather undercuts the moral and spiritual value of religion.

After all, “even the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

 

Update — My friend had to take her post off Facebook.  The Christian person who we were arguing with is a family member, and it was causing friction that they didn’t need.  I respect that decision.  You can’t choose your family, after all.

On Getting Back to Writing

Tags

Things are going really well for me right now – personally & professionally – and I’m finding myself in a much better headspace these days. Traditionally, me in a better headspace means me writing… but the new job, as much as I’m enjoying the challenge and the opportunities (not to mention the steady paycheque) doesn’t leave me a lot of time during the day to write.

Four days a week I work a 12-14 hour day, on a good day and sometimes as much as 14-16 hours on a long day. As much as I enjoy my job — and The Wife™ has commented more than once that I get home tired, but not miserable, like back in the day when I worked in a call centre — that does mean I don’t have a lot of time in the evenings in which to get myself sorted and writing.

And I’m not writing as much as I used to, which is becoming a serious problem for me.  But I’m only working a four day week, which means I’m getting a day off every single week, although it tends to float around depending on business needs.  So I’ve come up with an idea. Not an original idea, by any means, but a good idea, I think.

One of the things I used to do, back in my university days, was attend writers’ workshops where you were given a topic and had to write on it, whether or not it was something you were interested in. It didn’t matter what you wrote, but you had to use the assigned topic as a catalyst to improve your writers’ craft. And it was quite interesting as a technical challenge, and I’m glad I did it.

So I’ve made myself a promise – I’m going to write at least one blog post per week. And posting on my “day off” will be mandatory.  If I can get myself into the habit of posting regularly, I can hopefully get my writing to improve. And it doesn’t matter if I’m creating epic blog posts, so long as I’m creating something in the way of a post. The great ones will filter to the top, and at least the less-great ones will keep me improving as a writer.

And being a good writer is not only important to me, but I’m starting to believe it’s good for me too. Yes, it takes good headspace to let me write but maybe if I start making myself write, regardless of my current headspace, it’ll force me into that good space whether or not I start there.

Or something like that.

Nazis in Our Midst

I’ve got to get something off my chest: I genuinely don’t understand the people on my Facebook feed who are condemning the young woman who punched out a Nazi at the Peterborough rally yesterday. There’s been a lot of hand-wringing and talk about slippery slopes and “violence never solves anything” and I do not understand it.

Or maybe I do understand it: If you feel that way, you’re refusing to acknowledge the real problem. Because the real problem is frightening. The real problem requires real, solid action. The real problem is not that punching a Nazi looks bad on the TV, or that it’s “poor tactics”, or that violence begets violence.

The real problem is that we have Nazis in our midst and people don’t want to admit the danger that represents.

That is not hyperbole: This morning, Kevin Goudreau, the swaztika-tattooed scumbag who called yesterday’s “anti-immigrant” (read: anti-non-white) rally, tweeted “Now that we’ve diagnosed Peterborough’s leftist disease, exposed to the shagrin (sic) of many parents and grandparents.phase 2 is the cure.check.”

His response to the outpouring of community solidarity and love was to propose “the cure” for “leftism.”

He means death, in case you still want to wear your blinders.

He means curing leftism by killing those he sees as leftists. He just threatened to kill everybody at that rally yesterday, and a lot more people besides.

Because that is what Nazis do: They kill. If you don’t fit into their vision of a perfect world, you will die. That is also not hyperbole. They killed around fifteen million people they didn’t like the last time they took over a major industrialized country. Another fifty million or so died trying to stop them. The death and destruction laid at the feet of the Nazis and their allies is so vast we don’t even have accurate numbers, but even the most conservative estimates say that approximately 3% of our species died in that war. Fifteen million of those deaths were in the Holocaust, our name for the industrial murder or millions of Jews, LGBTQ people, disabled people, political opponents of the Nazis, and a dozen other “undesirable” classifications, years of suffering, grief and horror that we literally cannot imagine. And I do mean literally: the mind actually recoils from those images, those realities.

And these modern Nazis look at that death and horror and they see something good. They want in on that.

The Canadian Nationalist Front, Boudreau’s fascist political party, states that it seeks “a return to Canada’s original predominantly white-European makeup.” They are vague on how that would be accomplished, but even the most cursory thought about their intent reveals the only way it possibly could be accomplished: Eliminating everyone who isn’t “white.” That means mass deportations and concentration camps and death squads. That means gas chambers and ovens and mass graves. Here. In Canada.

Think about that, really think about what that means. And do not dismiss it as “unlikely” or “impossible.” Nothing is impossible: it happened before and one of the things that allowed it to happen is that good people dismissed the possibility until it was too late.

These Nazis want to kill me. They want to kill my wife. They want to kill my family and my friends and almost everybody I care about, because of their ethnicity, or their religion, or just because of their politics. They would — right now, today, this crisp autumn morning — they would drag me and mine out of our home and shoot us in the street if they could get away with it. Their self-styled leader just said so on Twitter.

So I don’t understand how people can wring their hands and make excuses about false equivalency and about slippery slopes and condemning anti-fascist violence. There is no equivalency between fascist threats and defending ourselves, because we are already the bottom of the slope: There are Nazis openly walking our streets and threatening our families. And that fact that they can do so with impunity tells me that “leaving it to the police or the courts” is not an option.

Violence begets violence? So be it. I woke up this morning and found that a monster named Kevin threatened to kill everyone I care about, and he did it not with anger but with a self-satisfied smirk. It’s something he’s been saying for years. And yes, that should frighten you, because it sure as hell frightens me. But we cannot allow ourselves to be controlled by our fear.

Open your eyes. Know your enemy. Then fight him and fight to win… because losing to these scum means horror beyond imagination.

On Sartorial Accomplishments

Tags

,

I haven’t been writing much on this blog for the past few months (and I admit it, a surprising number of my blog posts begin with that sentence or some variation of it) but at least this time I have a couple of reasonable excuses: the first being that I started another blog for my scouting interests and have made several posts over there; the second being that I’ve finally gotten a job.

The getting of the job, about eight weeks ago, was something of a surprise. I’d been working with a new job developer at a local employment agency, who had lined up several interview opportunities over the course of the late winter and early spring, but none of them had panned out. A couple had fallen through after multiple interviews, and I was frankly pretty crushed and fighting a serious bout of depression because of it. The developer lined up another interview which, if I may be blunt, I thought was pretty Mickey Mouse: based entirely on my resume I was to meet a potential employer at 10:00 on a Saturday morning at a Starbucks down the street from his house; the job, I was told, was to be this gentleman’s driver and general assistant following some recent health problems.

I used to be an office manager for a small IT consulting firm, so being a glorified limo driver was not something I was really excited about – especially in the state of mind that a winter of disappointment had placed me – but I figured anything was better than nothing (despite evidence to the contrary) and I’d throw on a clean set of khakis and go over and see what was what. I wasn’t taking it too seriously, so I might as well be comfortable. It was coffee at Starbucks, for pity’s sake.

The night before I went to the interview, however, I mentioned my planned attire to The Wife™ and she insisted that, no, I should wear a suit. This was a job interview, however unusual the venue, and one wears a suit to a job interview, period. I thought about it and agreed. I certainly wouldn’t hire someone for the lowest, most menial position in any organization if they showed up in anything less, because businesswear shows that you’re taking this seriously. It shows that you respect the potential employer enough to make an effort, and if I wasn’t going to make the simplest effort to try and get the job, why should they expect I’d make an effort to keep it?

So Saturday morning I got up, showered and shaved, dressed in my one and only suit, put on the more sober of my two ties, and drove into St. Catharines to the Starbucks. And that suit was a good idea: I was hired after ten minutes of what turned into a ninety minute conversation and I was hired at the salary I named (which was my salary at the old job, plus about ten percent) without a second’s hesitation; in fact I suspect I could have asked for more and gotten the same reaction.

The job, which does indeed involve driving this gentleman, is way, way more than being a driver. I am, technically, the executive assistant to the CEO of several companies, but it was made clear to me right from the interview that this is more of an apprenticeship. My new boss is looking for someone he can train up to be his assistant, his representative and eventually his proxy within the large structure of the financial, import and cosmetics companies he owns. He told me in the interview (and this is an exact quote): “I want to get you to the point that, if there’s a problem in Vancouver, you can fly out there and handle it so I don’t have to.”

This is the opportunity I’ve been looking for, and the potential is enormous: Salary, bonuses, travel, pay increases, responsibility, respect. It’s amazing… and at times I still can’t believe my good fortune. And one of the things my new boss told me, shortly after I started working for him, was that he was impressed by the breadth of the experience on my resume and that my work history got me the interview… but it was the fact that I was wearing a suit on a Saturday morning that got me the job. First impressions matter, he said, and nowhere do they matter more than in business; clearly I had the right attitude.

It was the only suit I owned, and I wore it, and I got the job. And then I bought two new suits in the week between the interview and my start date because yes, first impressions matter in business. And over the past couple of pay cheques, I’ve invested in more shirts and ties, because you can get away with a charcoal or a navy suit every day, as long as you mix it up with the shirts and ties. I now have three suits, ten ties, four tie bars, two pairs of suspenders, a business card holder and an understated-yet-elegant fountain pen, a pair of italian loafers and a whole bunch of pocket squares. I’ve learned how to tie a Double Windsor knot while half asleep, and the various ways one folds a pocket square, and what tie colours work for sending the appropriate message in whatever setting, and why you should care what colour and pattern your dress socks are, and the vital importance of carrying a Tide-To-Go pen in your briefcase.

This is an important job, an interesting job and a job with a real future. Frankly, I’m enjoying the hell out of it, in the way that one does when one is being challenged. I work very long days – part of my job is to meet the boss at his St. Catharines home at 07:30 in the morning, then we drive to the office in Richmond Hill, which ia about a hundred miles one-way on some very crowded highways. Most nights I’m home by 19:30 or 20:00, and I get up early to do it all again the next day. Some days I’m working for twelve hours, some for sixteen, but however tired I am at the end of the day, I don’t get that worn out and crushed feeling I used to get working in a call centre.

My boss could drive himself, of course, but he prefers to work during the four or five or even six hours we spend on the road between home and the office and various meetings, and he knows well enough that he can’t drive his car and be constructive at the same time… a lesson that various other commuters I’ve seen on the roads could learn. His time is way too valuable to waste aiming a luxury car through gridlock traffic on the QEW, so his assistant gets to do it. And as his assistant I get to hear him work, and I work with him, and I meet his various business contacts and partners and employees, and I’ve been introduced far and wide as his assistant and learned the value of business cards and the etiquette of presenting the same, and recently he’s has me taking the lead in some meetings, and sometimes he even sends me to the meetings on my own, and he always solicits my opinions after calls and meetings to make sure I’m learning things… and more and more often to find out if there’s something I caught that he might have missed, or an angle that he hadn’t thought of, or just to see if we’re drawing the same conclusions or how our conclusions differ.

Business, I’ve learned, is all about relationships and finding a way that everybody wins at least a little, because in business people who screw over other people might make a lot of money in the short term, but they sure as hell won’t be successful over the course of years.

I’m working hard but I’m learning a lot, and earning good money, and there’s a lot of potential for growth. And I have to say it: one thing I’ve never been, in these weeks I’ve been working, is bored. This is an important step in my career and our family’s future, and I’m excited to be a part of it.

And heck, I’m even learning to enjoy wearing a suit.

 

 

A New Blog

Just a quick update here — in an effort to keep my personal stuff personal, I’ve started a new blog for my Scouting stuff.  I’ll still be publishing stuff on this blog, of course, but this lets me keep my political rants and personal stuff separate from my Scouting stuff, which conceivably will be seen by my Scouts.  Not that I’m ashamed about what I write here, but I would prefer to avoid any controversy that might detract from the important and nonpolitical goal in Scouting of mentoring and encouraging youth.

Astute readers might notice that I have moved and backdated couple of posts from this blog to that one in the interest of keeping things separate.

 

Regarding Scouting

You may laugh when I tell you this, but I was a Boy Scout.

In fact, my entire family was involved in the Scouting movement in one way or another: my father was a Scouter, my mom and sisters were heavily involved with Guiding; my maternal grandfather was a Scoutmaster back in the 1960s, and so on. I was, quite literally, raised in Scouting. I started in Beavers and went all the way to Rovers. My last Rover camp was in the spring of 1997, and I moved away to college in September of that year. Much of my childhood and teen years — Cubs through Venturers — was spent as a member of the 1st Blenheim Township troop.   Shortly after I moved away I learned that Scouts Canada had “modernized” the curriculum for Scouting, followed closely by the news that 1st Blenheim Twp. had shut down for want of active membership and leadership.

Almost twenty years later, I’ve been considering getting involved with Scouting again. I’ve lately taken up hiking and general bushcraft as a hobby and a way to keep in shape and I’ve been enjoying re-discovering the skills I’d learned, as they bring back happy memories of my years in Scouts. You see, 1st Blenheim Twp was in many ways an extremely old-fashioned Scout troop — rather than being held in a church basement or community hall, all our weekly meetings were held at Peace Haven Scout Camp (which was closed and sold off by Scouts Canada in the early 2000s) and our program was based largely on old, 1940s, 50s and 60s-era Scouting manuals rather than on the less outdoors-oriented program that our contemporaries were using. Outdoorsmanship, orienteering, fire lighting, rope and axe and knife skills were all emphasized in a way that — in retrospect — I now understand was an extremely unusual throwback to the Scouting of previous generations.

I cannot emphasize enough the impact that Scouting has had on me throughout my life, often in ways that I only came to fully understand years later, and now that I’m at a stage in my life where I’ve settled down somewhat the notion of returning to Scouting and giving back to a new generation has a strong appeal. With my return to hiking and general outdoorsy-stuff, I started thinking about getting back to the Scouts and began researching what was going on with Scouts today.

As part of my research I looked at the current state of Scouts Canada, particularly as it exists after the “modernization” efforts of the late 1990s, which of course I missed during my almost-twenty-year hiatus from Scouting. While I strongly approve of Scouts Canada’s LGBTQ-positive stance and the adoption of a co-ed structure, frankly I wasn’t otherwise excited about the current state of their program. It just doesn’t seem to include any of the things I enjoyed as a boy, and it seems to wholly lack the formality, discipline and structure that I now understand was a formative part of my upbringing.

As for the current administrative culture of Scouts Canada… well… I don’t think I would be a good fit in the organization as it exists today. From the outside looking in, there seems to be an enormous emphasis placed on fundraising and comparatively little emphasis on teaching the youth skills and discipline.  Certainly I find the current cost structure of Scouts Canada to be extremely discouraging — $200 per child per year, plus uniform, plus camping costs, plus weekly dues, plus et cetera, which when totaled-up can mean a rather significant barrier to a low-income family wanting to enroll their child in Scouts… a problem which is only exacerbated if that family has more than one child. I was one of five kids that my family had in Scouting or Guiding, and if the annual cost had been that steep then we simply would not have been able to pay it… nor would several other families in our community.

Prohibitive costs, a money-oriented administration made of paid bureaucrats, steadily declining numbers, an organization that has repeatedly “reorganized” itself in the twenty years since I stopped being involved, steadily dropping membership numbers and a current program that, in my opinion, doesn’t reflect the Scouting that I knew growing up, much less what my grandfather would have recognized… much less what Sir Robert Baden-Powell would have recognized.

After a lot of reading and soul-searching, I was forced to come to the conclusion that Scouts Canada is just not Scouting anymore… which was was an unexpectedly strong disappointment for me.  To be clear: I know several people who are still involved with Scouts Canada, especially in local leadership positions, and I don’t include them in that assessment — I’m sure on a local level there are plenty of people who are doing the very best they can with what they’re provided, but generally speaking I feel like the organization as a whole has lost its way.

So, despairing of the current state of Scouts Canada I did a Google search of “old-fashioned Scouting”…. and thus did the BPSA come to my attention.

The Baden Powell Service Association was founded in Canada in 1998 as a response to the “modernization” effort and the increasing costs of maintaining the growing bureaucracy of Scouts Canada. Allied to BPSA organizations in the UK (which started in response to similar “modernization” efforts) and in the USA (which started as a backlash against the Boy Scouts of America’s notoriously homophobic policies), the BPSA member-organizations declare themselves adherents of “Traditional Scouting.”  They’ve adopted a program based on Scouting “as it would have been during the lifetime of Sir Robert Baden-Powell.” Actually it’s mostly based on Scouting as it was during the 1950s and -60s, which was something of a golden age in terms of membership and participation. Like Scouting during that era, the BPSA refuses to have paid staff, relying entirely on volunteerism in order to keep organization local and cost to youth and their families at the bare minimum.  Unlike Scouting during that era, they welcome LGBTQ people, atheists and agnostics, and are co-educational.

Rather than being affiliated with the World Organization of Scouting Associations (WOSA) as Scouts Canada is, the BPSA is affiliated with the World Federation of Independent Scouts (WFIS) and maintains an official policy of “goodwill and co-operation with any other Scouting organization of like minded intent” in accordance with the original Fourth Scout Law: A Scout is a friend to all and a brother to every other Scout.

In response to the creation of the BPSA in Canada, Scouts Canada has sued them repeatedly, first to prevent them from using the name “Scout”, which the court allowed on brand-protection grounds — they aren’t allowed to call themselves the Baden-Powell Scouts‘ Association, which is the name the organization uses in the UK — and then to prevent them from referencing Sir Robert Baden-Powell, which the court quite rightly threw out. Repeated lawsuits and threats of legal action seem to have occurred since, frequently over online domain names. From what I’ve been able to glean from the internet and various archived forums, the current Scouts Canada administration is very hostile to and mean-spirited about the BPSA: They maintain an official policy that the BPSA are not Scouts, should not call themselves Scouts and have outright forbidden all Scouts Canada members from interacting with the BPSA on pain of expulsion. No BPSA member is allowed to use Scouts Canada equipment or permitted to be on Scouts Canada property, Scouts Canada members cannot attend the same events, and so on.

Yeah, that’s not exactly the Scout spirit that B-P would have wanted and I can’t say it’s impressed me very much. In fact, that was the final nail in the coffin in terms of my opinion of Scouts Canada: I might not like their program very much, especially compared to the active and old-fashioned Scouting of my youth, but it’s the administrative culture that’s the real deal-breaker. From what I can see, this is just petty territorial piss-posting and it’s not the sort of behavior I would expect from an organization supposedly dedicated to the high deal of fostering the development of the nation’s youth into responsible, self-reliant citizens.

(My read on the BPSA’s view of all this is that there’s a lot of hurt feelings but a definite sense they’re in the right, with just the slightest overtone of smug self-righteousness… although that’s less grating to me than it might be because I’m pretty convinced they’re the ones behaving like grown-ups in this situation.)

Anyway, last week I took the plunge and contacted the local BPSA troop here in Welland. The local Scoutmaster (they use the old titles and uniforms along with the old program) called me back in very short order and gave me an invitation to come out to a meeting or two in order to get a feel for their group… and I got a bit of their backstory: Apparently the entire 9th Welland, from Beavers to Rovers, quit Scouts Canada in June and moved to the Baden-Powell Service Association en masse as a response to the now-unsupportable cost of membership. A few dozen families, which included all the leaders and more than fifty youth, quietly made a unanimous decision and switched over as a community.

According to the Scoutmaster (and this is admittedly hearsay) Scouts Canada fought them tooth and nail, up to and including spamming the families of the kids in the unit with misinformation and outright falsehoods, threatening legal action and even trying to convince their sponsoring church to take away their meeting space (I guess that last didn’t work out, since the minister doubled-down on the congregation’s support.) When it became clear that the 9th Welland — now calling itself the 9th Welland Traditional Troop — wouldn’t be dissuaded, they were forced to turn over all their resources, money and gear, up to and including the kids’ neckerchiefs. The Scoutmaster tried to put as nice a face on it as possible but between his tone of voice and the slight but obvious hesitations where he was carefully not saying things, I got the distinct impression of real emotional distress. I certainly wasn’t going to press him about it on short acquaintance — I’d imagine the insiders’ view is pretty grim and half a year is hardly time for that sort of wound to scab over.

I will admit that I’ve had some pangs of worry about taking on this responsibility in the face of so much hostility by Scouts Canada, but in the end I don’t suppose their attitude matters: If the current administration chooses to behave that way, then in the end it’s on their honour, not mine. And to everyone’s credit it does seem that both sides have tried to keep the tumult away from the youth who are, after all, supposed to be the ones who receive the benefit of Scouting, whomever provides it.

So I’ve committed to trying out the Baden-Powell Service Association’s interpretation of Traditional Scouting.  I’ve looked into the available resources through the BSPA-ON website, as well as readings from BPSA-USA and BPSA-UK, and I’ve come to hope that the BPSA might manage to combine the best of the old approach to Scouting with the best of the new. They’re co-ed, they’re LGBTQ-positive (especially BPSA-USA, which is vehemently pro-LGBTQ) and they make accommodations for non-religious and alternatively-religious people in ways that WOSA-affiliated Scouting organizations have stubbornly rejected for decades.

In addition, and I strongly approve of this, the BPSA’s policies and leadership training places maximum emphasis on protecting youth: no one wants a repeat of the tragic abuse scandals that plagued the BSA and Scouts Canada during the 1980s and 90s.  I’ll have to pass a police check and provide four personal references to even become a volunteer with the local group, much take leadership training.  All adult interaction with youth is under the “two deep” rule that I’m familiar with from the SCA: two non-related adults, minimum, at any time in any given situation involving youth.  Leadership training in the BPSA is touted as being to the same — or better — standard as that of Scouts Canada… a fact perhaps unsurprising considering that most BPSA leaders in Ontario are ex-Scouts Canada.

So in preparation for this new adventure, I’ve done what Traditional Scouting has done and gone back to the source material. Happily, the BPSA provides a free online library of the original documents of Scouting, from Baden-Powell’s original Scouting For Boys on up, plus decades of commentary and resources, all in PDF format.  Reviewing this material, I find myself getting more and more excited for this Tuesday night’s meeting. I’m really hoping that this works out. I enjoyed Scouts so much as a boy, and it was so important to me, and I thought that part of my life was gone forever: now I find that I should be able to participate in Scouting again and, hopefully, be able to give something back… a notion which has an appeal that’s surprisingly strong.

But there is one thing I’m not going to compromise on: First and foremost, I’m going to make it clear to the local leadership that I’m an LGBTQ person and that, while I won’t make a big deal about it, neither will I hide that fact. If there’s an LGBTQ service patch or pin or something I can wear on my uniform I’ll make earning it my top priority, so that any LGBTQ youth I work with know they’ve got a role model and someone they can talk to: gods know my teen years would have been a lot happier if I’d had someone who could have done that for me. I know the BPSA has an official policy of being inclusive, but sometimes the reality on the local level might be a bit less open-minded. Best to address the issue right off the bat, and explain my reasoning behind it, which I think is entirely fair.

The Single Most Important Safety Measure for Solo Hiking

Tags

, ,

I enjoy solo hiking.  Part of it is the convenience of being able to just say “I’ve got nothing to do today, I’m going hiking”, part is the confidence-boost of being self-reliant, but most of it is just being able to be alone with nature.  Solo hiking, however, comes with a very specific set of dangers, the most pronounced of which is this: If you get in trouble, you’re on your own.

All my recent hiking has happened in and around Short Hills Provincial Park, which is a pretty tame wilderness.  It’s 660 hectares of Carolinian forest and post-agricultural meadows, with well-marked and frequently-traveled trails.  Sturdy bridges cross every stream.  It’s right in the middle of Niagara wine country, for pete’s sake, and it’s five minutes from an emergency room that I can personally attest is well-staffed and modern.  There are no dangerous animals or poisonous snakes.  Walk a hundred metres out of the park in any direction and you’re on someone’s front porch.  Walk into the middle of the park and there’s a well-tended Scout camp.  This is not the back of the beyond, is the point I’m trying to make.

But… the park straddles the Niagara Escarpment.  Some of its trails are very rugged, climbing up and down steep ravines.  There are impressive waterfalls, yes, and they’ve carved out impressive limestone gorges to a depth of ten metres or more.  Because of the rugged terrain, cell phone coverage is spotty, especially in the lower parts.  There is no source of potable water in the park — not so much as a public tap — and the streams are known to harbor giardia and cryptosporidium, so you have to pack in your water, period.  There is no overnight camping in the park and the place closes at sunset.

The other day I took a solo hike on the Swazye Falls Trail.  It was a long morning’s counterclockwise loop through the western end of the park with lots of vertical changes and — on the eastern side of the loop — almost no tree cover as the trail skirts a lot of open meadows.  It turned out to be a very hot day.  I packed three liters of water in my pack and had a bag of gorp for snacks in my backpack.  I had my cellphone in my pocket, and a small first aid kit in my pack.  I was wearing a multi-tool and a lighter on my belt.  I had a map and compass handy.  I was sun-screened and -hatted to a fare-thee-well.  I was, in every way, prepared for a day out in the woods… in fact, I was probably over-prepared, but what the heck: it’s good training at the very least.

hiking_daybag

The contents of my day pack.

As I was working my way through back from the “falls” — there was no actual waterfall, just a dry gorge and an algae-befouled basin, a testament to this summer’s drought conditions — I paused to open my last 500mL water bottle, looked up, and was approached by only the second person I’d seen all day: another hiker who was going the other direction.  Or rather, she wasn’t a hiker, she was a pedestrian.  Black yoga pants, red sleeveless top and she was wearing crocs on her feet.  No hat.  No bag.  No map.  No water.  No cellphone that I would see.  Not so much as a fanny pack.  She was dressed for the mall, not the trail… and in fact at a shopping mall she probably would have been at least carrying a purse.  She was more than a kilometre into a six-and-a-half kilometre loop.  And she asks me, nicely, how much further until the waterfall.

I was absolutely gobsmacked.  I explained, as politely as possible, that it would be at least a mile through some very hot and exposed fields, before getting into some pretty rugged country through the trees.  I didn’t want to be all pushy, but she was not outfitted for the kind of terrain she was going to be coming into, and I tried to communicate that to her as gently as I could.  She thanked me and continued on her way.  I shook my head and continued on mine… and checked the local papers for any “missing persons” reports the next day.

There is a basic degree of preparedness that you must, repeat must, have before you set out on even the most forgiving trail.  This person did not remotely meet that standard, and I can only hope that she turned around and came back shortly after she passed me; if she finished her hike successfully it was only through sheer idiot luck.  As my dad is fond of saying, the good lord protects fools, drunkards and little children.

I don’t believe in unearned luck, and divine favour is a fickle commodity at the best of times.

Let me describe my “nightmare scenario” on the trail: it’s not being mauled by an animal or struck by a sudden blizzard; it starts much more innocuously:

The Wife™ is out of town, or maybe she had to go to work early.  It’s the middle of the week and don’t have a job to get to, so I decide impulsively to go for a hike.  I leave the dogs at home and drive out to the park; I’ve got some water and my cellphone, and that’s all I need. I spend a happy summer’s day romping around and as it starts getting dark, I see a perfect shot of a waterfall from the edge of a ravine.  Cellphone in hand, I walk to the edge, frame the shot… and take a bad step.  Maybe I slip.  Maybe I wasn’t paying attention to where I set my feet.  Maybe a bit of the limestone rim gave under my weight.  And now I’m thirty feet down at the bottom of the ravine.  My cellphone is shattered against the rocks and has fallen gods-know-where.  One of my legs is broken, or both are, or maybe my back is.  I’m critically injured, the sun is setting, the park will close soon and no one else is going to use this trail tonight.  No one knows I’m here anyway.  Best case, I’m in for a very painful, very long night… and maybe more than one.  I have no food.  I have a few swallows of water left.  By midday tomorrow, I will be too weak to even call for help from the hikers and cyclists I can hear using the trails nearby.   Sure, maybe The Wife™ gets home and gets worried and calls the cops but how will they know where to look?

And what started as a pleasant afternoon in the woods suddenly becomes — not five miles from a modern and well-equipped emergency room in the middle of a popular and well-traveled park — a life-or-death crisis.

Sounds ridiculous, right? But it could easily happen.  In fact, it happened just last year.  A 33-year-old local man, whose name was never released to the media, died by misadventure just off a well-marked and popular trail in Short Hills Provincial Park… the very same trail I hiked that day.  The details of his death are not on the public record, so maybe he was killed instantly when he hit the stones at the bottom of the gorge.  Or maybe he lingered for hours or days in pain, unable to call for help.  But he was never declared missing and nobody knew he was in the park until a hiker found his body.

The single most important safety measure you take when solo hiking is this: Let people know where you’re going and how long you expect to be there.  During my first hike in the park I had to change my planned route partway through and I actually texted The Wife™ my new route so that someone would know where I was.

I am not reckless in when I go out to the woods.  I always carry a first aid kit.  I always carry a source of fire — in fact I carry two.  I carry a little food and a multitool and even a jumbo garbage bag which I can use to improvise a crude shelter.  I have a compass and some cordage in the form of a paracord bracelet I wove myself. In an emergency situation, I have the skills and the tools to improvise what I need to survive… all of which means nothing if I can’t make my way out or call for help and nobody knows to come looking for me.  In those circumstances all I’ve managed to do is buy myself a slower, more agonizing death.

hiking_pockets

The contents of my pockets, sans cellphone (which I used to take this photo)

I have come to love the lush woods and the winding trails and even the deep limestone ravines of Short Hills Provincial Park… but I have absolutely no intention of dying there.  I could go out on dozens or hundreds of solo hikes and never need more than the contents of my pockets and often I won’t even need that, much less the emergency gear and first aid kit I routinely carry in my backpack; thousands of people each year hike that park, prepared or unprepared alike, without needing anything more than a bottle of water and some sturdy shoes.  But an emergency might happen and if someone knows I’m there, then I’m never really on my own, I’m just a greater or lesser distance from the search party that is inevitably coming.

I don’t believe in unearned luck… but I definitely believe in bad luck.  And it doesn’t matter how smart or fit or prepared you are: Bad luck can kill you.  Try not to give it any unnecessary opportunities to do so.

And hell, even if I do take that bad step and I get killed outright, at least my family won’t spend days or weeks not knowing where I am or what happened to me.