Noodling

What If Every Day Were Your Birthday?

On my most recent birthday, I was having a good time, enjoying all the pleasant experiences, pleasant people, being surrounded by those who love me--and I thought, "What if every day were my birthday?  What if every day I woke up feeling this is a special day, that I’m going to be treated like I’m loved and important to the people in my life, that I can do what I like  and smile on the world, because it’s smiling on me?"

Just for awhile every day, one could ask: What will today be like if I expect to be treated that well, as considerately, as kindly, as lovingly? What if I accept nothing less?

• I awaken with anticipation of pleasure, thinking that good surprises will grace my life today.
• I eat what gives me pleasure for breakfast, and dress in what gives me pleasure, what looks great on me, is comfortable, feels good.
• I walk with a spring in my step, with anticipation of people relating to me with pleasure. I approach or contact people I know are likely to do that.
• I am kind to myself all day, resting when I am tired, caring for my body and my spirit with top level care, because I’m important and I know it.
• In the afternoon or evening I surround myself with those who love me and enjoy my company. We show appreciation to each other. It’s a party just being together.
• People give me things they think I’ll enjoy. I show appreciation. I give gifts to myself and let others know I appreciate gifts in season and out of season, and I give them to them too.
• I go to bed satisfied, remembering the pleasant experiences and sensations of the day. I look forward to a future with such pleasures and joys.

Extend the joys and pleasures of your birthday, of holidays and events. Don’t wait for them to come to you, build them into your life on a continuing basis.

Happy Whatever Day It Is Today!

Research It

This has been called the Information Age. Interesting to observe how free and easy access to information is currently used, misused, and not used at all. You'd think, information being so easily available, that people would seek to discover what they don't know that would be useful to them to know.

But, there is an interesting twist on how prevalent and free information is being drowned out, overlaid, and pushed away by propaganda.

Propagandizing is, historically, the way power seekers have made their kingdoms and kept them. Previously, it was easier for both small operators and big power seekers to do that. One could access the desired populace in only a few ways, and it took some time to do it. One could more easily limit access to any information contrary to one's propaganda claims and urgings.

Now, with vast information resources accessible via the internet, power seekers have to persuade the objects of their power seeking to not go looking for or at contrary information. They sometimes create a flurry of activity and information release, seeking to drown out all contrary information. Or they may try to divert those who might seek it by focusing on something that seems more urgent--like, say the abortion issue.

As you notice efforts at power seeking, whether it be Fundamentalist Christians, or other fundamentalist groups, politicians, or those trying to sell ideologies or bigotry, look for how they approach research. Do they try to restrict it? Overwhelm their audience with enough material to keep them distracted from searching for themselves? Demonize any contrary information sources? Make personal attacks against or deride those who want more information?

In the USA we have a curious situation: politicians going to religious media power brokers to consult them, apparently to ensure a favorable result at election time. At least one of those big media power brokers supports the Christian Fundamentalist position of restricting opportunities for women.

One sided information is sent forth regularly from such media sources. That's OK, freedom of the press and all. But, it's not OK for the President of the United States to be courting support from someone who doesn't think I, or anyone else, deserves less than equal rights and opportunity.

Millions of loyal viewers and listeners hear only one side of issues from those media moguls, intimidated away from doing their own research by fear and encouraged ignorance.

That's how it is now. I do think education will gradually seep into their insulated information worlds from other sources. Maybe their children will learn how to do research at school and help their parents realize they can search for themselves and make up their own minds independently. Maybe they will get the web surfing habit and it will dawn on them that there could be more and better info out there, and they'll be tempted to look at it.

What prompted me to write this post was the announcement of an upcoming conference involving one of those media people and someone featured on one of the biggie media/political influencers' shows. It's an annual "Truth and Life Conference" at a religious college, with this year's theme being, "Created Male and Female."

After a bit of flowery verbiage the announcement says, "Today's post-modern culture puts forward skewed views of masculinity and femininity. Biblical guidelines for each of these identities conflict with the world's, and that combination can confuse Christian men and women about gender roles and responsibilities."

All the speakers are male, including the one speaking on the topic, "Femininity." No females in evidence in the announcement. The man speaking on femininity tirelessly and adamantly opposes female equality. He recently appeared as a guest on two sessions of the radio show hosted by the President's Christian Religious Right advisor denouncing a new gender accurate translation of the Bible because, among other reasons, he says that a Bible that takes 3600+ masculine oriented terms out of the Bible takes a lot of manhood out of the Bible--it's not as much a man's Bible anymore. (In spite of the fact that those original masculine terms actually were meant to include women.)

All this would just be business as usual for fundy religious types if they didn't have political power. But, they do. And, it's based on the willingness of listeners who vote to not do research for themselves on issues and urgings by the fundy media people who hold their attention and allegiance.

I think the solution to this problem is twofold.

1. Encourage research and independent, well informed decision making.
2. Vote next time.

Making Money With Your Blog

I didn't get into blogging to make money, righteous me. But, I'm not at all opposed to making money. I like making money. So, naturally I'm interested in making money with my blogs. How to do it? And, especially, how to do it in a way that fits with how I want my blogs to be received by their readers, and how I want to attract more readers?

I think why one blogs is the first question to ask, before looking for ways to support the habit in a manner to which one would like to become accustomed. My why is that I have passions, interests, and issues about which I want to write, opine, and/or share information. Also, I love the act of creating a new blog, setting it up, making a header, tweaking the design, creating an atmosphere and home for the information and content I'm going to provide. So, I do it also because it's fun. And, thus, I need to choose money making vehicles that will be fun too, or at least not get in the way of the fun, and will align with my other reasons for blogging.

Next, I look at ways other people make money with their blogs. And, lucky me, I happened to know someone who partnered with a big money making blogger and produced a telecourse called "6 Figure Blogging." I recently took the course. I think it's good--lots of material. I've printed out over 200 pages of transcripts from the six teleclasses and am going to methodically go over them, probably repeatedly, to apply what's there. 

Have I made any money yet using what I've learned in the class. Yes and no. I've made a few dollars so far, but not much. But, I've only scratched the surface of what they share with their students. I'll know more later. Can you take this class too? Yes, it's available in a home study version now. Is it worth the money? I think so, but I'll know for sure as I apply what I've studied.

Meanwhile, here are some things I can share with you, not sharing their course, mind you, but I've been studying the subject of making money with my blogs since before the course, reading widely, and setting up preliminary money making resources. Here are the main ways I've found, that are relatively easy to set up, to make money with your blogs.

1. Merchandise. Before I started the 6 Figure Blogging course I'd already set up my first experimental CafePress.com product store. CafePress has lots of nifty products, and setting up your own store there is easy and inexpensive, even free if you'd like to start small.

My blog, Pat's Cheap Coaching School now has its own store at CafePress. No, I've not made a lot of money yet, very, very little in fact. But, I think it's fun to create products, and so I'll probably do more of it, thinking if I make a dime of profit, it's still a dime.

2. Ads. I've placed Google Adsense ads and Chitika MiniMall ads on several of my blogs. I like being able to choose the products offered by Chitika ads rather than just take the ads someone else selects for me. I also like their ads' clean look, and they seem so friendly and helpful. Makes a good impression on me, and I hope on blog visitors as well. I've only recently added them, so don't know how long it will take for them to show their earning potential. I've read that some people do quite well with them.

3. Affiliate programs. I also have Chitika affiliate ads on my blogs, because they look good and tasteful, and I like Chitika's ads. I plan to add more affiliate ads and links to some of my blogs. I don't want to add any affiliate though that I don't think is a great choice for my readers. No affiliates just to have affiliates.

4. Books. I have sizeable book recommendation lists on several of my blogs, linked to their pages on Amazon.com. My blog host TypePad.com makes it easy for me to add books, automatically include a small cover photo, and my Amazon.com affiliate number to the Amazon link.

5. Other products. It might be ebooks, ecourses, personal or group coaching, consulting, or a package that includes several of those items. I haven't utilized this category of money making possibilities yet, but will probably do so.

Three important points/conditions/elements to also consider when thinking money from blogs: niche, traffic, and additional information.

Niche: This is a toughie, I think. And, I admit I do not know how to choose a perfect blogging niche from a money making perspective. I chose my niches because I am interested in them and/or have written books related to them in some way. You want a niche that you really like, because if you don't really like it, you're not going to want to post as frequently as you'll need to to have a profitable blog.

You don't want a niche that is already dominated by someone you can't compete with successfully, or that is just too broad and already over blogged. Better to be a big blogger in a small niche, than a small blogger in a big one. But, not too small, or you will build it, and even if they come, there won't be enough for a game.

Traffic: Ya gotta have traffic. Get listed in blog directories (search for them on Google). And, post regularly, good quality stuff, so people who visit you will come back again and again.

Additional information: You must keep on learning about your subject, and your niche. Study the subject of making money with blogs. A great jumping off place for that is ProBlogger.net. You'll find plenty of material there, plus links to much, much more.

Coaching and Coachville: Past Present and Future

I came to coaching via Thomas Leonard's Coachville. I wish I remembered who or how I came upon that delightful find, but I don't know if I found it in my web surfing, or if someone told me about it online. It was a wonderful discovery, the sort of thing I love--cutting edge, a new way of doing things, changework of the best kind, and at the center, a charismatic, sparkly, authentic and generous innovative wizard. Some call him genius, maybe he was. He was certainly brilliant, and creative like the wind.

I jumped right in, found there was a term for folks like me, "early adopters," and began to soak up the goodies provided so freely and inexpensively at Coachville. I learned I was a coach already, had been for years without knowing it, and now I could add more and better to my changemaking toolbox. Pig heaven for me.

Thomas was the hub around which coaching expanded and deepened. He was a source of rich content and excellence. I took ecourses and telecourses from him, printing out lessons and filling notebooks with pages carefully inserted into plastic page protectors for future use.

I wanted to help, to share what I can do. What I could do for Coachville and Thomas was start a coaching email discussion list. I'd been running lists for a few years, and knew how to make them work. I knew one specially for coaches and Coachville would be a great asset for everyone involved, so I volunteered. I couldn't get through the bureaucracy, small as it was, at Coachville. I was shifted to one person and another to get permission to set one up.

Eventually, I managed to ask Thomas directly, and almost immediately, as was his habit, I had the OK, and the list COACHV-L was up and running. Thomas gave me permission to do it on a trial basis only. He said, "I test everything." If it didn't pass the test, he dropped the project. COACHV-L passed its test quickly, and I operated the list independently from that time until this year when I gave it up to another manager at the new and very different Coachville. COACHV-L is practically defunct now.

What happened to COACHV-L is a bit like what happened to Coachville. COACHV-L was removed from its original hosting its format changed, and it was given to a different manager. It lost its vitality, and has dwindled away to almost nothing.

The heart of Coachville, and I think coaching too, was Thomas Leonard. He was the life force at its center. In Coachville's case the life force, the vitality, slowly dwindled away after Thomas' died.

When he died, Coachville, with all its assets, the knowledge base he'd created himself, and with the help of his famous R&D team creation method, and the knowledge base created by others, was willed to one person, coach Dave Buck. It was the one decision, the one project Thomas could not test. And, it was a mistake. Such a costly mistake, I'm sure no one even knows how costly, that it has set the whole world of coaching back.

Money Thomas left for the maintainence of Coachville disappeared via several holes in the safety net he hoped would be there for Coachville and his crew of Coachville regulars. The regulars he worked with have left the ship, for the most part, leaving Dave Buck at the helm, on a decidedly different vessel, bound for ports unknown, changing course often, with makeovers aplenty.

I started a new email discussion list COACHTALK-L some time before I handed COACHV-L over to its new home and managers because I feared the coming hosting changes would be the death of the list, and also because I wanted to create a coaching list that would be independent and not vulnerable to shifts and management changes or edicts about what could be posted on it.

There seems to be a sort of an ennui in coaching now. And a milling around of the crowd, doing this and that on a small scale, many trying desperately to sell things--particularly to each other.

There is no central force in coaching, no personality at the center with the strength of presence to act as both magnet and outflow source of plenty. The glory has departed. Where once there was a sense of adventure, now there is a sense of disappointment, confusion, and the sounds of get-rich-quick hype. Where once there was team and true community spirit, now there is factionalization and the forced, false, "created community."

Coachville was not the only coaching show in town, not the first one either. But, because of Thomas Leonard's place there and his place in coaching, because of his huge presence--made even larger because he did not seek to be the top bananana--Coachville was coaching's metaphor. It's the meta place to watch in the coaching world.

What's going to happen with Coachvile, and coaching? Were does it go from here? I'll make some predictions:

There will be more milling about.

Dave Buck will either sell Coachville, or sell part of it, or it will continue a downward path, hacked to pieces by his constant makeovers. Or he will manage to successfully remake it into a feel-good academy for change that has little resemblence to the Coachville of Thomas Leonard.

I think he'd be smart to sell all the old Thomas Coachville material to a coalition of the original team and let them revive it as it was, and then take it in the direction they think Thomas might have, not messing with his original work, but innovating as he did, with the help of a large R&D team network of coaches and other contributors.

There will be a proliferation of coaching rip off artists, some legitimate services as well, who attempt to exploit the newness of coaching.

And, somewhere out there, someone will have an aha moment and say to themselves, "Why not use Thomas as a model. Why not go back and look at what he did and how he did it, what his operating principles, techniques, and methods were, and use them as a basis to create a new Coachville from the ground up."

Somewhere there is another charismatic person, or a small group of people who have a Thomas-like ability to create and to utilize the creativity of others, to ring true right down to the middle, and to project that clear integrity and generosity in the low key way manner of Thomas. Not a Thomas, but not too many miles distant from being a Thomas.

When that happens, coaching will recover, slowly maybe. And the sun will shine on coaching again. I hope it's soon.

Debate 2, And Critique: What Men Think About Women, Sort of

Pat: Well, Patoo, I think we should debate again, and this time do a better job.

Patoo: Good. I thought the first one was bordering on silly.

Pat: I'd say it was whimsical, tongue in cheek, and satire.

Patoo: That would be pushing it.

Pat: So, how about we discuss men today?

Patoo: OK, but not exactly.

Pat: What do you mean, not exactly?

Patoo: How about we discuss what men think about women, and all that it leads to?

Pat: Well, I like that, but it seems sort of arrogant to assume we know what men think about women, since we're not men.

Patoo: True, but I think we can skate around the arrogance, mostly.

Pat: And, what region of men's thinking about women would you like to address? The area is so vast.

Patoo: How about what/how traditionalist Christian men think about women, and some of the things that leads to?

Pat: Sure. We've observed a lot of those guys up close and personal. And some at a distance, fortunately.

Patoo: How about you take one side and I'll take another?

Pat: OK. Do you want to be the Daddy or the Mommie?

Patoo: I'll take the traditionalist male position, and you can take the egalitarian female position.

Pat: OK. How about we switch our names to Trad and Egal so our readers won't get confused?

Patoo/Trad: OK. I'm glad to have this opportunity to discuss such an important issue with you.

Pat/Egal: Thanks. I don't usually debate with trads. In fact, I make it a practice not to.

Trad: Why is that?

Egal: Because I find that most of the trads who want to debate don't intend to do it in good faith, it's generally a trap they're trying to set, and it's unsatisfying to deal with them.

Trad: Why do you think they do that? Not saying I think they do, but I've known trads who would probably do that.

Egal: I think it's a Jesuitical type of attack argument that they've learned from their ecclesiastical forebears. And, from thinking everything is war, operating from a military model--taking Onward Christian Soldiers too literally.

Trad: I'll try to avoid that approach. But, you must realize we see real danger in egalitarianism, and the way to deal with danger is to confront it squarely, and defeat it.

Egal: It's true, I think, that there is real danger to traditionalists from egalitarianism, but not the kind of danger trads think it is.

Trad: How so? We believe there is a great moving away from historic, orthodox Christianity into a secularization of the church, and egalitarianism is a part of that. We're trying to protect the church from watered down, diluted Christianity. We're fighting for its survival

Egal: It's easy, too easy, to see all change as being connected, when it isn't. In the case of egalitarianism, it's not a part of secular influences on the church. That can be proved historically. Egalitarianism has it's roots in the art and science o hermeneutics, the principles applied by all who seriously study and interpret laws and documents.

Trad: You egalitarians like to say that, but we are concerned, very concerned, that there is much more to it than that. We are concerned about radical feminism, the breakdown of law and order, drug use, marital breakdown, and homosexuality.

Egal: It's interesting that traditionalists usually try to tie all those issues to egalitarianism. But, they have absolutely no connection whatever. Radical feminists, of which there are very few, have a parallel in radical traditionalists.

Most traditionalists do not believe women are evil and should be violently suppressed. But, there are traditionalists who do believe, teach, and live that. You have no problem differentiating between radical and moderate trads.

The supposed breakdown of law and order just hasn't happened. There is actually less crime now than previously. The building of new and bigger prisons has to do, not with more crime, but with the commercialization of prisons, "law and order" issue electability of politicians, and imprisonment for petty crime and drug use. It's a national scandal.

Divorce is more common among people in Bible Belt states, where traditionalism is most prevalent, than in more "liberal" states. So, it can hardly be proved that egalitarianism, considered by most trads to be a liberal position, is the cause of family breakdown.

As for civil rights for gays and lesbians, that issue has absolutely no connection whatever with equal opportunity for women. Both are social issues, but they have no more in common than do the issues of ageism and racism.

Trad: So, what do you think traditionalist men think about women?

Egal: I think they think women are potentially dangerous, and best kept under some kind of control.

Trad: Do you think all trad's believe that?

Egal: No, I don't think it's a conscious belief for most, but that it expresses itself as an uneasiness, a discomfort, a vague fear that the unknown results of women moving out of their previously prescribed places will have repercussions they won't like.

Trad: We like the comfortableness of "how it's always been done."

Egal: Yes. Most traditionalist men haven't examined the egalitarian position and evidences. They like things as they are, don't want to change, and have no reason to look very far into the issue.

Trad: So, what's the harm in that?

Egal: In many ways, there isn't harm in it. In other ways, there is. If the traditionalist stays in a traditionalist environment, and is personally non-repressive of women, he can get along quite well, as can those around him who have the same beliefs. But, it's a system, and when something that doesn't fit the system enters or arises from within the system, it can get messy, and painful for individuals who become victimized.

Trad: For example?

Egal: Let's say the trad moves in a comfortable, non-repressive traditionalist environment, say a church where men lead, women participate and don't lead, and everyone seems pretty happy with that. But, a new family comes into the church headed by a severely repressive man who insists that women are participating in the church at a level that they should not. The system must either repress its women, or expel the man and his family from the group. If he is the new pastor, it's even more disruptive and painful, and victims will be created.

Or, another possibility, a daughter in the church begins to ask questions that no one wants to answer, or cannot answer well enough to support the traditionalist position. The daughter will be victimized. There are many other possibilities. These things do happen. Sometimes on a grand scale, as when extreme traditionalists took over the Southern Baptist Convention.

Trad: What you've said seems reasonable, but I'm not convinced. And, more than that, I'm not really interested in studying egalitarianism. I think it is not high on my priority list. I'm happy where I am, as are my wife and children. I am in a church that is flourishing, and I'd like to keep it that way.

Egal: Personally, I'm happy for you to be where you are with it. I think it's important for traditionalists to be straightforward and honest about their beliefs and non-attack oriented toward those who disagree with them.

Trad: Yes, I'm not comfortable with the attack dogs of either egalitarianism or traditionalism.

Egal: I'm not aware of any egalitarian attack dogs. There may be some, but I don't know of them. I do know some egalitarians who are somewhat abrasive and offensive in their manner. As for the attack oriented traditionalists, some are probably simply zealous people who think they are doing the right thing. Others, though, I'm convinced are either vicious power mongers who see the issue as a way to get more power for themselves, or men who are deeply fearful and distrustful of women.

Trad: From your perspective, as an egalitarian, I'm curious about what you would recommend trads do to improve their position.

Egal: I'd recommend that they treat women as well as they possibly can, look to see what their real needs are, and help them get them met. Not relying on some sort of mythology about women being "different" in any of the historical distortionist teachings, but asking women themselves what they need in today's world.

What, as a traditionalist, would you advise egalitarians to do to improve their position?

Trad: Provide educational materials, as widely, attractively, and freely as they possibly can. If they are right, and it's simply a hermeneutical/interpretation matter, then that is their best task--to let everyone know.

Egal: Thank you.

Trad: Thank you too.

Pat: Thank you, Patoo.

Patoo: And thank you too, Pat. We must do this again sometime.

Pat: Maybe we will, maybe we won't

Patoo: So, you think you're the one who will decide?

 

Debate

According to the 20 Posts in 20 Days Marathon rules, this needs to be a debate post.

I've been tempted to subscribe to an email discussion list under two different names and debate with myself on an issue. Tempted, but never done it--so don't suspect you know who my alter ego is.

But, I'm going to have a discussion with myself here, now.  I have no idea what we're going to talk about.

Pat: Hello Patoo. Welcome to my blog.

Patoo: Thanks, but I guess I could argue that it's mine too.

Pat: I suppose you could.

Patoo: So, why did you invite me?

Pat: I thought we could discuss some weighty or not so weighty matter.

Patoo: For instance, what?

Pat: Oh, I don't know. Maybe we could discuss men.

Patoo: That's a good subject, but I don't want to talk about it.

Pat: OK, how about equality for women?

Patoo: OK. What about it?

Pat: I'm for it.

Patoo: Me too.

Pat: OK, ummmm, we seem to agree on just about everything.

Patoo: No, we don't.

Pat: What don't we agree on?

Patoo: Going to bed at a decent hour.

Pat: That's true. One of us is very sensible about it, figures out exactly when would be a good time to go to bed so we won't be asleep in the morning when people call on the phone, and say, "Oh, did I wake you!? What time is it?" And the other one of us just goes right ahead and stays up doing things like writing, web surfing, or reading our latest book acquisition.

Patoo: As in, right now.

Pat: Yeah.

Patoo: So, what do you recommend, sensible one?

Pat: I don't think my recommendations work.

Patoo: So maybe we should ask for advice from our readers.

Pat: Good idea. But, if no one gives us any advice, we'll be embarrassed. It will look like no one reads this blog.

Patoo: We could post fake responses.

Pat: We could, but, we wouldn't do that because we are too integritious.

Patoo: True. Maybe we should discuss men after all.

Pat: No, now I'm not interested in the subject. But, I'm sure it's only temporary. Maybe some other time.

Patoo: I suppose you are getting sleepy, right?

Pat: Right. I want to go to bed, now.

Patoo: This is not a good ending for our debate.

Pat: True. Readers, please write an ending for us. Thank you in advance.

What If?

What if women had full equality throughout the world? What would be different if that were true?

What if you were suddenly given a million dollars, no strings attached. What would you do with it?

What if you had three wishes, and could only use them for yourself?

What if you woke up tomorrow morning and a miracle happened and your most irritating problem had been solved? What would you notice first that let you know the miracle had happened?

What if it were your favorite season all year long?

What if you looked great every day, all day long, and all night too?

What if all your friends, acquaintances, and family got together and told you how wonderful you really are?

What if you could have a perfect day? What would it be like?

What if you found ways to give yourself all of the above, or what they'd provide for you?

What if you began doing that today?

What if you began right now?

The Theological Expanation As to Why Women Only Should Do Housework

by Patricia Gundry

I have recently been thinking on an exciting subject with all those who seek to match the form of their life to higher forms and patterns in order to mirror those glorious things which we mortals often talk of but seldom understand completely and even more seldom are able to put into practice.

While meditating upon the subject of housework, after having spent an afternoon in the occupation, I realized that cleaning is but picking up objects and replacing them. In the case of dirt and dust removal it is the picking up of the object to be cleaned and then picking up the dirt or dust with another object, (say a cloth or vacuum cleaner) and depositing it elsewhere. By being a steadfast cleaner, the cleaning person thereby familiarizes her or himself with all the objects in the house. Again and again this picking up and laying down is enacted in the same rooms with the same objects.

There has been pressure for some time now on husbands to do their fair share of those cleaning tasks, that they should share in these duties in the name of mutuality of responsibility and mutuality of work, thereby freeing their wives for a wider scope of activities. And on the surface it is not too hard to see how people  could become blinded by such seeming reasonableness and fall into this unfitting sharing of work.

But there are larger issues at stake here. Do not be falsely led. We are enacting in our earthly relationshps heavenly patterns. We are but the reflection in the mirror. The real thing is beyond. There are reasons why we may not share these plebeian, but noble tasks so cavilierly. There is a firm and final reason why only women should do housework. It is because they must do housework to keep them home.

I know this sounds too simple, but like all great truths it sounds simpler than it is. It goes like this. The picking up and laying down of familiar home objects has a patterning effect on the mind of the one doing it. That is why women always know where the things are in the cupboard and men never do. Women's minds have been reinforced by repeated retracing of these steps; pick it up--clean it--clean under it--do it again next week, month, year, etc. So the woman is the one who should do it. It keeps her mind occupied with where things are, and whether they need cleaning or not, and where the man's socks are, and whether there is any more soda pop or chips.

This may appear trivial to you, but it isn't. By this constant conditioning, the home beocmes more important to the woman, it becomes her whole world. She can function there almost automatically. She also becomes attached to the objects involved. They become a part of her mental equipment. Thus, she is more thrifty. She will not throw out that old mop. She is too used to it. And she will stay at home and do all the work, lest someone else come in and mess up her kitchen. She grows to think no one else in the house can clean properly, cook a meal. It becomes true! Eventually no one else can. So you can see that she makes true what she believes, proving it was true, of course.

Now you may argue that if this really is all true, then that is but the beginning, that to be consistent and faithful the ideal women ought also to clean office buildings and theaters. Yes, and they often do, but it is all right for men to do these things, (provided they are paid adequately) just so they don't do them at home. For a theater or an office is only a building, not a HOME. And as but a shelter or repository for an audience it has no soul, no truth to keep alive, no tradition to maintain. So it's all right for men to be janitors.

There are practical reasons why women should do housework too. And this is also theological. You know, form reflects divine purpose, or anatomy is destiny, or something like that. The thing is that women are usually rounder and smaller than men and so they fit in small places easier. And if they fall off a high stool reaching something a larger man could clean with less effort, well, they bounce better, because women's bodies contain more fatty tissue. So the divine design shows up again.

Women have stronger hands for detergents. This was planned. If men use detergents too often, they get dry skin. Not women, they will use hand lotion. Men cannot do this because it is sissy. Women can take more heat on their hands. I am sure this is true because a well known theologian told me so.

You might be thinking that I have not adequately shown the theology involved in my first claim, that the design of the ages and all that decrees that women should do housework. Well, there is theology there all right, and glory too. But sometimes those who are too eager to analyze things and look for proof and are always doubting just miss these things a little too easily. And you may be one of those.

But in case you aren't and really want to know--it is because everything has a place. And if any thing or person steps out its place, the whole wonderful system will get out of kilter and the end of the world will happen, you dummy. And then the black holes, which are a form of the reality of the image of sin will suck us all up in them and that will be the end of that. And all because a bunch of people who aren't afraid to mess with the status quo let men share the housework.

Besides housework is good for women. See how they giggle, see how they like to wear bright colors, see how they dye their hair, wear lipstick. That's proof, for goodness sake. And anything that keeps women home more is bound to not only help save civilization as we know it, but undoubtedly will indirectly protect the ozone layer, and counteract global worming.

..............
Parts of the above originally appeared, under the same title, in the magazine The Wittenburg Door, number 49, June-July 1979.

Memes and Projects: The Universigram

I think I've invented something. I'm calling it a universigram.

Some time ago I wrote a message to an email discussion list as a sort of antidote to one derogatory to men that was posted on my list PHOEBE-L. For some time I've wished I had something I could use to reply to such messages that wouldn't humiliate or embarrass the sender of the offending message, but would counteract it and provide a gentle reminder to not post them.

The message I was responding to, one of those memeish messages that circulate around the internet,  was called "Because I'm A Man," and contained clever and funny accounts of what were assumed to be male foibles--hogging the TV remote, not asking for directions when lost, etc.

I called my response "Because I'm A Woman," and rather than refer to the other message, I just wrote one that followed the same general format, but with positive and counter content.

I didn't intend to or plan it that way, but at the end, I found myself recommending one of my own books as the final flourish. Looking the message over and thinking it was catchy enough to be shared by readers, I added a copyright/permission/free-use-if-no-pay notation and where my book might be obtained.

Later, I realized I'd never seen anything quite like that--that I may have created a new marketing vehicle, a message with wide or universal appeal that will keep on going indefinitely, and will, wherever it goes, also market a product or service.

Many of us share information on our websites and in email messages that function as keepers-with-purchase-info, targeted to a specific and relatively small group of potential buyers. However, I'm talking about a different sort of message, one with much wider distribution potential, the wider and more universal the appeal, the better.

The internet has created a world-wide community of people who love discovering something to share. The universigram message satisfies that desire to share. It has universal or wide appeal, encouraging readers to pass it on to others. I think all of us can, with some thought, create such messages, allowing them to market for us as they travel onward.

Write it once, it sells for you forever. I like that. And, assuming positive  value to recipients, it's also adding to the happiness quotient of the world. I like that too.

I'd like to welcome comments about differing kinds of universigrams, what they should contain, not contain, and where they might be introduced to the universigram passing-it-on stream.

Here's my initial universigram:
..............

Because I'm A Woman

Because I'm a woman, and I know what it's like to be the butt of stereotype
jokes, I won't pass any along, even if they are really funny and clever and
I think they are right on.
------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I know what it's like to be excluded, I'm going to
avoid like the plague excluding others because they are different, or
because they are men, even if it would make me temporarily feel superior to
do it.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I know what it's like to take care of other people
when they are sick and get little or no care for me when I need it, I'm
going to train all the people in my family to take good care of me too. I'm
going to insist on it.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I know what it's like to be stared at and mentally
undressed in public, I'm going to make sure I don't embarrass the man in my
life by asking him to do things that might seem natural to me, but that
aren't to him.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I know what it feels like to be unable to fix
something important, like a flat tire, I'm making sure I train myself to do
things like that so I will be able to take care of myself and others when
necessary instead of being at the mercy of circumstance.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I've been trained to give in and always let the
Wookie win, I'm working to learn to get my share, even if it's simply
parity with the remote control.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and some men won't ask for directions when they are
lost I make sure I insist we stop so I can ask rather than sit in
self-righteous superiority and not get where I want to go, or be late.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I know what it's like to want to talk but have a
silent partner sometimes, I find other people to talk to who have good
things to say to me.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I love my Mom, I make sure I get lots of good
times with her without expecting the man in my life to want to spend as
much time with her as I do. And I let him buy his own mother's gifts
because they mean so much more to her when they are really from him.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I've been trained from early childhood in the
niceties of courtesy, ettiquette and considerate behavior, I don't assume
everyone else has had the same training. So if I want to be treated well, I
educate the people in my life to do it, and make sure they do.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, I just might like different movies than the man in my
life. And that's OK, because it's our differences that attracted us to each
other anyway.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I know I'm going to be judged by many people today
entirely by how I look, I might be anxious about it and ask the man in my
life if he thinks I look good. Since he's not judged that way, he's not
going to be able to answer the question to my satisfaction. So maybe I'll
not ask him that tomorrow.
-------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm a woman, and I know what it's like to have to do more than my
share at home, I'll be smart enough in the future to never ask the man in
my life to "help" or thank him for "helping." I'll sit down with him on the
sofa with Patricia Gundry's book Heirs Together and divide work and
responsibilities between us :)

   ~ This has been a public service message from Pat Gundry to further
respect for women and men, and if it sells a book or two, it couldn't hurt.

Copyright 2005 by Patricia Gundry. All rights reserved. You may freely
share this message with others providing it is shared in its entirety,
including this part and my email and website addresses, and providing you
don't make a dime from it. Otherwise you've got to get permission.

Heirs Together is available from Pat Gundry and on www.amazon.com

Pat Gundry
[email protected]
http://www.suitcasebooks.com
--

20 Kinds of Posts in 20 Days Marathon

The Purpose Driven Man Rick Warren, of the all time book bestseller Purpose Driven Life fame, has his 40 days of purpose. And, the blogger at It's So Fantastic! blog has started a 20 Kinds of Blog Posts in 20 Days Marathon, inviting bloggers to join her in the challenge.

So, here it is, the starting line, which will be followed with, in reverse order, 20 different kinds of blog posts in the next 20 days, all written by Yours Truly, moi. I'll strike through each one as I post them.

The 20 Types of blog posts are:

1) Instructional
2) Informational
3) Reviews
4) Lists
5) Interviews
6) Case Studies
7) Profiles
8) Link Posts
9) ‘Problem’ Posts
10) Contrasting Two Options
11) Rant (this one should be easy)
12) Inspirational
13) Research
14) Collation Posts
15) Prediction and Review Posts
16) Critique Posts
17) Debate
18) Hypothetical Posts
19) Satirical
20) Memes and Projects

Ms It's So Fantastic! is using Darren Rowse's list of blog post types from his ProBlogger.net series on blogging block and how to overcome it. No need to have blogger block to go there and gather the great ideas for generating good content for your blog.

And, those 20 types of posts can also be used for any other type of writing, and in teaching and speaking, making presentations, etc.. Print them out, play with them, and see how many uses you can find for them.

What other types could you add to the list? Can we make it 25 types of blog posts? 30? 50?