Provocative Questions

JYProvocative Question #25 — Feminism

Fandango13 Comments

Our host for the weekly provocative question challenge is Jewish Young Professional, aka JYP. She pointed out that today’s JYProvocative Question is inspired by her own lack of inspiration.

When it comes to writing, what matters more – the inspiration that motivates you to start writing? Or the discipline to keep writing when you aren’t inspired at all?

I must admit that I’m almost never wanting for inspiration. Between prompts from other bloggers and what I read, see, and hear in the news and what is going on in my own life, there’s always plenty of fodder for my blog. And I feel compelled to write because I love to write.

There are times, however, when I wonder about having the discipline to post every day, in fact, multiple times a day. And recently, I feel like I’ve been in a bit of a slump.

I know a lot of fellow bloggers suggest that looking at ones stats for either inspiration or for discipline is a bad idea. But I can’t help it. Stats provide data to how many people are reading my post. And my stats have tanked.

I went for 62 consecutive months, from June 2018 to August 2023 with at least 10,000 views a month. But that streak ended in September 2023 and I’ve now gone for seven consecutive months with fewer than 10,000 views per month, including this month.

Im not sure what to make of this significant decline in monthly views. Is blogging generally on the decline or are my post less interesting or entertaining?

Well, whatever is behind the drop in views, likes, and comments, I’m still inspired to write and I’ve still got the discipline to keep posting.

At least for now.

JYProvocative Question #25 — Feminism

Fandango17 Comments

Our host for the weekly provocative question challenge is Jewish Young Professional, aka JYP.

Is feminism needed in 2024? If yes, what should feminism in 2024 look like? If no, what philosophy or movement should replace feminism in 2024?

Should feminism be needed in 2024? No.

Is feminism needed in 2024. Yes.

Why is feminism still needed in 2024? Well, let’s start with the Republican-controlled Supreme Court of the United States, which overturned Roe v Wade in July 2022, reversing a 50-year-old law giving women the right to choose abortion.

And there are the “red” states controlled by Republican governors and/or legislators who are banning abortions, including, in some cases, total bans on abortions even in cases of rape or incest. These same Republican states are passing legislation that criminalizes women who get abortions even if they have the procedure performed in states where it is still legal and criminalizes those who provide abortion services or even assistance. Republican legislators and politicians are taking names and kicking asses on everything having anything in any way to do with abortions, including starting to ban contraceptives.

Aside from taking away women’s rights to manage their own healthcare, women are still, on average, paid less than 80¢ on the dollar than men for doing the exact same jobs.

And I’ve only just scratched the surface of low-hanging fruit. Why aren’t women treated — in all respects and in every respect — as equal citizens under the law? Shouldn’t they be?

While feminism should not be needed in the middle of the third decade of the 21st century in America, it still is necessary, and will continue to be necessary, until the day comes — if ever — when conservative Republicans agree that women are not lesser citizens and should be treated in every aspect of life under the law as men are.

Oh, that reminds me. “Hey honey, I asked you to bring me a beer 15 minutes ago. Can’t you get anything right?”

JYProvocative Question #18 — Improving Healthcare Delivery

Fandango8 Comments

Our host for the weekly provocative question challenge is Jewish Young Professional, aka JYP.

So what is her provocative question for this week? JYP asks us…

What specific changes should be made to improve the healthcare system (in the U.S.)?

Bernie Sanders has been talking about it for years. Barack Obama tried to get it included in his 2009 health care reform initiative, the Affordable Care Act, (aka Obamacare). It’s called a “single-payer” healthcare system.

In that system, rather than multiple, competing, for-profit health insurance companies, a single public or quasi-public agency takes responsibility for financing healthcare for all residents. That is, everyone has health insurance under a one health insurance plan, and has access to necessary services — including doctors, hospitals, long-term care, prescription drugs, dentists and vision care.

However, individuals may still choose where they receive care. It’s a lot like the U.S. medical program for seniors, Medicare. Hence a U.S. single-payer approach has been nickname “Medicare-for-all.”

Unfortunately, Obama’s single-payer provision in Obamacare was removed from the proposed bill in order to get it passed in the Senate. It passed with all Democrats and two independents voting for it, and all Republicans, of course, voting against it.

Ask any current Medicare recipient if they think Medicare-for-all is a good idea and the answer will universally be yes. Well, except maybe from Republicans, who think the broken, for profit healthcare system in the United States is just peachy.

The biggest obstacles to adopting a Medicare-for-all/single-payer healthcare delivery system in the U.S. are political. Stakeholders who stand to lose — such as health insurers, organized medicine, and pharmaceutical companies — represent a powerful opposition lobby. But there are no practical problems within the single-payer structure that would prevent its implementation.

So to answer JYP’s question directly, adopting a single-payer, Medicare-for-all would go a long way to improving the healthcare system in the U.S.

JYProvocative Question #17 — Low Tech

Fandango21 Comments

Our host for the weekly provocative question challenge is Jewish Young Professional, aka JYP.

So what is her provocative question for this week? Well, without giving a definition of “low tech,” JYP asks us…

What was (or is) your favorite low-tech innovation?

If you live in an area like I live in, where, during the summers, temperatures average in the mid-to-upper 90s and where there are probably 10 to 15 days when they reach more that 100°F, then you, like me, might choose air conditioning as your favorite low-tech innovation.

I can’t deal with the extreme heat during the summer, so having central air conditioning keeps me going. Is air conditioning really “low-tech”? I don’t know, but since JYP left it up to us, I’m declaring it to be low-tech.

JYProvocative Question #16 — Inclusivity

Fandango22 Comments

Our host for the weekly provocative question challenge is Jewish Young Professional, aka JYP.

So what is her provocative question for this week?

Is it possible to create a space, community, culture, and/or policy that is truly inclusive of all? If yes, how does one go about creating that? If no, who gets excluded?

In the Animal Kingdom it is typical for different species of animals to be wary of other species. Antelopes don’t typically hang out with lions because lions eat antelope.

Human beings, all eight billion of us, are the same species. No matter where you were born, what language you speak, what color your skin is, what god you worship, what customs you have, or what traditions you celebrate, you’re all part of the human race. And yet….

Birds of a feather

Human beings (homo sapiens) have been around for 250-300,000 years. You’d think we’d know and appreciate by now that we are all the same species. But we seem to embrace the birds of a feather flock together philosophy. If you don’t look like I look, if you don’t speak my language, if you don’t worship my god in the same way that I worship my god, you are the “other,” and that means your someone to be feared, to avoid, to keep away.

And for that I blame religion. Religion promotes tribal-like behavior. If you don’t share and practice my religion, you’re not part of my tribe. So go away. Religion, in my opinion, brings together people who share the same beliefs, but separates people who have different beliefs.

Even for those who share the same beliefs, religion separates those with different colored skin, or in different socioeconomic rungs.

So, to answer JYP’s question, if we’re looking to create space, community, culture, and/or policy that is truly inclusive of all, remove religion from the equation.