Job-Shaming

A few weeks ago, Geoffrey Owens, a former actor on The Cosby Show, was the subject of not-so-good headlines. The Daily Mail had a headline titled “From Learning Lines to Serving the Long Line! The ‘Cosby Show’ Star Geoffrey Owens is Spotted Working as a Cashier at Trader Joe’s in New Jersey.” Other gossip news sources had headlines that period also highlighting this supposed “fall from grace” for the actor. Generally, many of the unsavory headlines related to Owens took on some version of “oh look at how the mighty have fallen.”

In truth, Owens still acts and took this grocery store job to supplement his acting income. But even if he had gone from being an actor to bagging groceries, we most certainly should not shame anyone for working an honest job.

We do put certain jobs on a pedestal, such as being a head of state, heading a Fortune 500 company, or being a major religious leader. But there are other jobs, such as fast food work, garbage collection, and cashiering, that are often viewed in a disrespectful and demeaning way. To an extent, I understand why it’s like that—we as a society value money, power, celebrity, and/or influence, and a job like being a cashier doesn’t seem to bring any money, power, and/or influence in the minds of many. At the same time, though, any job that contributes to the improvement of society, no matter how large or small that job may seem, should be respected and not job-shamed.

Therefore, I propose that the following groups, among others, should get more respect:
1. Garbage workers, because they keep our streets and neighborhoods clean.
2. Grocery store workers, fast food workers, waiters and waitresses, and cooks who aren’t at high-end restaurants, because they are part of the process of making sure that we have food to eat.
3. Janitors, because our homes and buildings would not be clean without them.
4. Farmers, because we would not have food without them.
5. Plumbers, because we would not have functioning showers, sinks, and toilets without them.
6. Teachers, because so much of what we know comes from the work that teachers do.
7. Daycare workers, because little children would not have a place to go in the daytime without them.
8. Mechanics, because they help our cars function.

The value of a profession shouldn’t be measured in wealth, power, or prestige, but on the fact that people are helped as a result of the work. Any profession where people are helped as a result of the work in an honorable profession, a profession that does not deserve job-shaming.

Stalking is Not Funny, Yet is Treated as a Joke

I recently heard something on television that talked about stalking in a lighthearted manner. But this is not the first time I’ve heard stalking talked about in a lighthearted manner. For example, I’ve frequently heard people say in a lighthearted manner that they “Facebook stalked” someone.

These jokes, this lightheartedness, about stalking need to stop.

Stalking is defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as “the act or crime of willfully and repeatedly following or harassing another person in circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to fear injury or death especially because of express or implied threats; broadly: a crime of engaging in a course of conduct directed at a person that serves no legitimate purpose and seriously alarms, annoys, or intimidates that person.” Clearly, this is not a lighthearted matter. To the contrary, it is something that harms others.

And to think that many of us treat such harmful actions as a joke? I hope we stop doing that, as individuals and as a society. This casualness with which we talk about stalking is destructive in two ways.

First, it gives a wrongful impression of what stalking is and what damage can be caused by stalking. By making casual, even joking, remarks about stalking, we make it seem like it is no big deal when in reality it is a very big deal, such a big deal that it hurts the victims (at least emotionally or psychologically) in all cases and results in criminal charges for the perpetrator in some cases.

Second, it belittles the experiences of past stalking victims. The status quo is reducing the experience of stalking to a set of jokes and lighthearted remarks. These experiences should not be belittled, but instead listened to.

I acknowledge that I may be criticized here for “not taking a joke.” While I understand the criticism, I must also say that “jokes” about actions that harm people, such as “rape jokes” and “stalking jokes,” are really not funny.

But if it’s not funny, what should our attitudes be on stalking?

First, we should educate ourselves on what stalking is. Second, we should also educate others, as appropriate. Third, if you know someone who is a victim of stalking, please encourage the person to call 911 (if you live in the United States) or the equivalent emergency number in your country if there is immediate danger. Furthermore, if you know someone who needs support because of stalking, encourage your family member/friend to consider actions such as calling a crisis hotline, telling security staff at your job/school, developing a safety plan, and more.[1] Finally, if you know of resources for stalking specific to countries outside the United States, it would be great if you provide those resources in the comments section below.[2]

Stalking is a problem, not a joke. But if we take the problem seriously, maybe we can also take steps as a society to treat it—and talk about it—seriously.


[1] The Stalking Resource Center provides a variety of ideas, tips, and resources for stalking victims. Follow this link to see some of those ideas, tips, and resources

[2] While this post brings attention to how stalking is not taken seriously, I hope that it can also be a resource for those who take stalking seriously.

Want to Keep Your Catholic (or Non-Catholic Christian) Faith and Have Been Abused by the Church? There Are Places You Can Turn to.

A couple of weeks ago, a grand jury report stated that over 300 Catholic priests in Pennsylvania sexually abused more than 1,000 children.

For me, this report was a punch to the gut emotionally. As a practicing Catholic who, for four years, had deep ties to one of the dioceses mentioned in the report (Diocese of Harrisburg, during my time at college), it would be an understatement if I said that the report was difficult to take.

Yet, in spite of the difficulty of even thinking about (let alone writing about) those in my own denomination perpetrating such horrible wrongdoings, I think that it is important to talk about this matter. Namely, it is important to dedicate my first “blindly just” post to organizations that are working in Catholic circles, or in non-Catholic Christian religious circles, to help victims of sexual abuse.

The purpose of this post is not to go into one of the “oh…look at the fact that not all Catholics/non-Catholic Christians are abusive” types of messages. No, the purpose of this post is to: a) attempt to be a resource for people who love their Catholic (or non-Catholic Christian) faith but have been hurt by sexual abuse within Catholic/non-Catholic Christian institutions and b) show to advocates on this issue, regardless of faith, some faith-based allies in the battle to confront sexual abuse in the Catholic Church (and other spaces) that many of us might want to consider working with.

Organizations doing this good work include, but are not limited, to:

  1. Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP)-SNAP was started in 1988 by Barbara Blaine, a victim of sex abuse by a priest. Since then, SNAP has worked to help survivors and those vulnerable to abuse, while at the same time advocating for various reforms to help curtail abuse in the Catholic Church and beyond. They have everything from their own hotline to support groups to advice on choosing a therapist. http://www.snapnetwork.org/
  2. Road to Recovery-Road to Recovery was founded in 2003 by Robert Hoatson. New Jerseyans may be most familiar with him as a candidate for governor last year, but he was actually once a priest who was suspended from performing priestly ministry because of his tireless advocacy for victims of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church (and is now no longer a priest). He and Monsignor Kenneth Lasch (who is still a priest, albeit a retired one) have an organization dedicated to, among other things, providing services to victims of abuse, offering referrals, advocating for victims of abuse, and providing direct and indirect services to victims of abuse. www.road-to-recovery.org
  3. Christian Counseling & Educational Foundation (CCEF)-They provide Christian counseling to people in need at three different locations across the United States. This is more on the counseling side of things than the advocacy side of things, but counseling is still an important resource in confronting sexual abuse. https://www.ccef.org/
  4. AdvocateWeb-From what I can tell, AdvocateWeb is, above all else, a site dedicated to providing a wide range of resources to victims of sexual abuse (and even some resources for family and friends of those who were abused). Think of AdvocateWeb as a database of resources for those who have been abused, instead of simply being a resource all by itself. Speaking of being a database of resources, they have a whole page dedicated to Christian organizations and groups dedicated to helping to address sexual abuse. So, if you’re not satisfied with any of the previous three resources I gave, maybe a referral from this fourth resource might help. Several clergy people (albeit I’m not sure of denomination) are on their Advisory Council. http://www.advocateweb.org/

These organizations, all of which have deep ties to Christian faith (and with the top two, more specifically Catholic Christianity), do not negate the damage that’s already been done by Catholic clergy. However, these organizations are hopefully of help and hope to advocates, as well as people who want to keep their faith but struggle because they were abused by someone within their own churches.

All New: Posting on Just Actions People May Not Realize!

As I said in my previous blog news post, I am going to somewhat expand from the original focus of my blog. Namely, I will start to occasionally post on just actions that people may not realize.[1]

However, I don’t want to start that series without any further explanation of what it’s called, why I’m doing this, what sorts of posts I hope to have, and what I hope to accomplish.

So, for starters, any posts on just actions that people may not realize will go into a section called “Blindly Just,” mostly because I feel that name fits in with the concept of posts being about just actions that people may not realize. It will be a section, just as “Racial Issues” or “LGBTQ+” are sections.

As for why I’m doing “Blindly Just” posts, the answer is that a lot of thought and prayer has led me to do this.[2] In these thoughts and prayers, I decided that I should not only focus on situations where we or others are unjust without realizing it, but also situations where we or others are just without realizing. In other words, balancing the negative with at least a little bit of the positive.

As such, the posts I hope to have will highlight how some of us (or others) are just without realizing it. By writing these posts, I hope that readers become more aware of how some of us are, or can be, better agents of love and justice toward others and ourselves.


[1] I have no set schedule on how frequently I will do these “blindly just” posts. That being said, I hope to do a few “blindly just” posts a year.
[2] As I’ve said on multiple occasions, I am a believer in Christ. So yes, prayer went into this.

The Ableism of Western Masculinity

When I, and others, read definitions of what it means to be “masculine” in the western world, we get words like: active, aggressive, ambitious, analytical, assertive, athletic, authoritative, blunt, certain, competitive, decisive, dominant, forceful, independent, individualistic, physical, protective, self-reliant, self-sufficient, strong and tough.

Some of these meanings of masculinity are perfectly okay—being active, ambitious, analytical and certain, for example, can be positive traits in many circumstances.

Other traits are, in my humble opinion, traits that contribute to gender inequality and so many sexual assaults against mostly women—being aggressive, authoritative, dominant, and forceful come to mind. The topic of how some ideas of western masculinity contribute to gender inequality and sexual violence may very well be the subject for a future post, but I won’t cover this in my current one.

And then there are other “masculine” traits such as: active, athletic, independent, physical, self-reliant, self-sufficient, strong, and tough. These traits are ableist, or discriminating in favor of able-bodied people, at least to some extent, because men who have disabilities are then viewed as completely unable to fit these traits of what it apparently means to be a “true man” or “manly enough.”

Consider the following:

  1. If you are a blind person, you don’t fit into some people’s ideas what it means to be masculine. The definition of masculinity includes independence, self-reliance, and self-sufficiency, yet you need to depend on other people, animals or things to guide you.
  2. If you are deaf person, you don’t fit into what some think it means to be masculine. You need to depend on sign language from others or closed caption coming from a machine, so you therefore don’t have the independence, self-reliance, or self-sufficiency associated with masculinity.
  3. If you need a cane to get around (let alone if you’re in a wheelchair), you don’t fit into our society’s idea of what it means to be masculine. Regardless of what your level of activity is (and I know my share of people who are on a cane or in a wheelchair AND are actually quite athletic), you are often viewed as inactive, unathletic, dependent on others and weak if you use a cane or are in a wheelchair.

The bottom line is that if you are a man with some form of disability, that person likely does not fit the definition of masculinity. In fact, because masculinity is ableist, the very ideas associated with modern western masculinity completely exclude men with disabilities the “manliness club.”

So when I hear someone talk about “toxic masculinity,” I agree—masculinity is toxic. The ableism of masculinity makes masculinity inherently toxic.

Note: I want to thank the blog Me, Myself and Disability for bringing this issue to my attention. When I first discovered that blog, I read a post about the author’s own experiences with the ableism of masculinity. If you want to get a more personal perspective on the ableism of western masculinity, I highly recommend that you read his post on the issue.