There is no where safe to flee

In looking for books with gay stories I came across Brendan and Casper by Mark Roeder. Whatever source I was looking at said the book was about these characters as adults caring for children. That is intriguing to me. However, I saw the book had a prequel and a sequel. Recently, I bought the prequel (might as well start the story at the beginning) A Better Place and just finished reading it. I enjoyed it. The forward of this book said it is the fourth book of a series, though the other books don’t seem to be about Brendan and Casper. The earlier books were a romance that included teen suicide, a suspense story about courage in the face of terrorism, a ghost story about religious persecution. None of those sound particularly appealing. And, the forward said, this one included conversion therapy. Oh, dear. I’ve read enough about conversion therapy and met a guy or two who went through it (and were still gay) to know it doesn’t work and is essentially permission to torture gay youth. I wasn’t keen reading about someone going through it. But I read it anyway. In 1980 Brendan is a high school junior, captain of the football team, popular, handsome, from a well-to-do family, and has girls wanting to get his attention. He’s terrified that anyone would find out he is gay. He’s sure he would lose it all. Casper is a freshman, small and skinny, and from the poorest home in town. His mother has died, his father is drunk, and his older brother is abusive. Brendan, who could have his pick of any date, thinks Caspar is cute, though doesn’t know if Casper is gay. Before I got to the scenes about conversion therapy I wondered which one would be the one sent there. Since I already knew Brendan and Casper and their love survive this story to be featured in the next book, I knew this one would have a happy ending. So, I guess I can say that after the therapy episode and other harrowing moments the boys escape town and do find a family that loves them. The last third of the book is enjoyably idyllic. I’ll have to buy the next book. And the one after that. At times I got a bit annoyed with the way this author named his characters. In that last third of the book we meet Nathan and Ethan. And in this second town there is a student named Brandon. Couldn’t he find other modern names such as Liam? In this last section we meet Mark, Taylor, and a few others, including Ethan, who I quickly figured out were the major characters of at least one of the earlier books. That didn’t encourage me to read those books. I visited Flint yesterday to see an exhibit at the Flint Institute of Arts that has another week to go. This exhibit is titled Political and Personal: Images of Gay Identity. The exhibit is from a collection of prints assembled by Jack Pierson, a native of Flint. Through his life he collected 856 works. After his partner, Robert Martin Purcell, died, Pierson began donating his art to the FIA. From the way the exhibit description is written I don’t know if Pierson donated his entire collection to the FIA or just most of it. The show includes images of men, several naked or nearly so. It also includes a couple political posters. At the end are what I think are images of transgender men. The collector also asked artists, some famous, to do self portraits or to create a scene meaningful to them. I enjoyed what was there. Alas, we’re told there are 856 prints that Pierson collected and we are shown only 24. Even in that small room I thought what was on the walls could be moved closer together to fit in another half dozen. Or the show could have been given a much larger room. I looked through several other exhibits until the FIA closed at 5:00. Then I had supper with Sister and Niece. Niece told me she had seen the exhibit. When she saw what was in that small room she went to the welcome desk and said, OK, I’ve seen part one of the show. Where’s the rest of it? Michigan is updating its COVID data only twice a week now. One of those days is still Friday. So my downloading the data on Saturday is still appropriate. In the week before this past week the new cases per day was increased from 136 to 160. The peak in this past week is 169, a slight increase. It at least means the case rate isn’t falling. The good news: for the past two weeks the deaths per day has been 10 or below. Sarah McCammon of NPR spoke to Kataluna Enriquez. The reason is because Enriquez had recently been crowned Miss Nevada, becoming the first trans woman to do so. Her win means she will be the first transgender contestant in the Miss USA pageant this fall. The link includes a photo of Enriquez in her rainbow sequin gown. If she wins that and goes on to Miss Universe she will be that pageant’s second trans contestant. Spain sent a trans woman in 2012. Last Thursday Kerry Eleveld of Daily Kos reported that the House has approved a select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. The resolution allows Pelosi to name eight members and for Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to name five with Pelosi’s consent. Pelosi has now named her members and included Liz Cheney, a Republican who refused to participate in the Big Lie and was stripped of her leadership job. McCarthy has not yet named his selections. I heard Pelosi was asked what she would do if McCarthy names no one. She replied we already have a quorum. Walter Einenkel of Kos reported some lobbyists for ExxonMobil believed they were interviewing for jobs, but were really talking to Greenpeace. They dished about their employer. And Channel 4 in the UK aired it. There’s quite a backlash. The lobbyists bragged how they’ve pushed talking points to weaken the environment part of Biden’s infrastructure. They identified eleven senators considered “crucial” to act in ExxonMobil’s interest over the people of the entire world, willing to block or dilute legislation. The list includes moderate Democrats Manchin and Sinema, plus another four Democrats. The lobbyists also explained the company’s support of a carbon tax. They can support it because they know it won’t pass. Joan McCarter of Kos expanded on what Einenkel wrote. Many of those Democrats were part of the group that came up with the bipartisan infrastructure bill, the one that some Republicans (and ExxonMobil) could support. The company is also fighting the tax increases Biden wants to use to pay for the infrastructure expenses. McCarter wrote:

Here's who those Democrats are doing this big favor for: a company that knowingly misled the public on climate change. For decades. ... This is who the Democrats in that bipartisan "gang" are working for. Not you. Not your children and grandchildren. ExxonMobil. That's who.

Leah McElrath tweeted a short video by Kevin Pluck showing a page from an Exxon report back in 1960 with a graph of the expected growth of atmospheric CO2 along with an expected rise in temperature as a result of the use of their products. Over that graph is the actual atmospheric CO2 and temperature readings since 1961. The actual readings follow Exxon’s projection quite well. McElrath wrote:

Global warming is directly related to use of fossil fuels. Exxon knew this in 1982. No doubt other fossil fuel related entities—including those within planned economy government structures—knew as well. But just like we can look back and say *they* knew *then*? *We* know *now* about what the future holds if we don’t take action to bring about a paradigm shift and end our reliance on fossil fuels. Current research is public and not hidden away. We know. We on the road to a future in which not only will severe weather events continue to increase in severity and frequency, but entire swaths of currently inhabited land will become uninhabitable. Climate catastrophe mass migration already happens. That phenomenon will grow. Infrastructure failures, damaged crops, habitat destruction, decimation of populations of fish and shellfish, wildlife encroachment on human areas, mass extinctions, and water shortages—ALL of these things too are already happening. They will only get worse without action. ... There is no where safe to flee.

Mark Sumner of Kos reported:

Solar panels and windmills did not set the Gulf of Mexico on fire this week. Fossil fuels did. On Friday, Mexico’s state oil company, Pemex, managed to set the ocean on fire. The flames were the result of an underwater pipeline rupture near the Ku Maloob Zaap oil platform about 70 miles off the Yucatan coast. When natural gas from that pipeline caught fire, it resulted in a thousand-yard patch of ocean that was literally boiling. A vortex of flames developed around house-sized bubbles of methane that burst from the surface of the sea.

Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg tweeted she hears claims that Jewish law does not permit abortion except when the mother’s life is at stake. She reviewed relevant portions of the Talmud and other Jewish sources. Some sources are clear that the fetus is less important than the mother. Not just the life of the mother. Also her health. And to avoid causing her great pain. That last one refers to mental health, more important than physical health. Abortion is permitted, and in saving the life of the mother, required in Judaism. That’s why abortion is both a right to privacy and a religious issue. Jewish law should not determine secular law any more than Christian fundamentalist understanding should. If your faith tradition doesn’t permit abortion, don’t have one. But one should still support abortion access for all. Ryan Burge tweeted a chart showing poll results by generation for the question “I know God really exists and I have no doubts about it.” The values in 2018: Silent generation (before Boomers): 70% agreed. Boomers: 59% Gen X: 62% Millennials: 44% Gen Z: 33%. In the last 20 years the percent of Millennials who agree has dropped more than 10 points. In the last four years Gen Z dropped more than 15 points. Some commenters say the question was poorly worded. A lot of people attending church have some doubts. Leah McErath responded:

It’s almost like growing up during the sexual abuse scandals of the Catholic Church and the weaponization of faith for partisan political ends by white evangelicals had an impact. Add to those factors an economic environment that presents fewer pathways forward for reliable self-sustenance and the fact that the world is starting to burn. Is it any surprise young people are without faith? Interestingly, these numbers likely also reflect the impact of the internet. Gen Z is the first generation to grow up accessing online content as both a babysitter of sorts and as a resource for personal inquiry largely not constrained by parental supervision in many cases.

Jim Heartney pointed out:

I'm guessing a good amount of it is growing up with the internet providing plenty of non-believing content. When I was growing up, the only way I'd find unabashedly atheistic content would be scrounging the public library or buying books by authors I hadn't heard of.

Seth Cotlar teaches American History at Willamette University and tweeted a thread:

Thomas Jefferson simultaneously saw the horror and oppression that was slavery, AND tried to come up with pseudo-scientific justifications to explain to himself and the world why maybe it was ok. So which "Jefferson the founder" are we to teach to our children? The Jefferson who came up with bulls---, racist justifications for slavery? Or the Jefferson who bemoaned the negative impact slavery had not only on enslaved people, but also on American society more broadly? In case it wasn't clear, that was a rhetorical question. We should teach Jefferson in all of his complexity and contradictoriness. We should also teach about the enslaved people of his era who thought a lot about what freedom meant, and acted accordingly.