Paul’s Perambulations

It was a winter wonderland on our backpacking overnight camp in the woods in the middle of the Blizzard of 2010.  Beautiful snow. Click Comment for details.

This article was a Valentine’s Day offering by the NYTimes. Click Comments for my posted responses.

I submitted the following (click Comment) in response to an article in Friends Journal (February, 2010) asking how can we support the troops without also supporting the war. Read my Comment to learn how.

 I contributed the following post to the discussion that followed this NYTimes article    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/health/12brod.html?ref=health :

This is the best article in the magazine section today (and perhaps the only one to tell the unvarnished truth). My wife and I (in our 60’s) hike, camp, backpack outdoors, but most days simply walk. We eat relatively healthy (but don’t obsess over food choices) and take no medications. When I say we take no pills, most friends seem amazed. Sometimes their response feels critical or angry, because they see my behavior as implicit criticism of their lifestyle.  Living healthy doesn’t mean you don’t get sick — I’m getting over a month of viral bronchitis. I’m usually surrounded by many young people, both healthy and sick, and we all get sick at times.

See Comment for my responses to two related NYTimes articles regarding healthy living.

The following is my comment (#75) on the NYTimes article in the title above. Click my comment button for my second comment (#177) on this same article.

Honor societies often mean essentially nothing nowadays. I agree with the many comments that have already made this point. I disagree with #8 who says today’s students work harder. Number 8 and I are each expressing our own experience, but I expected much more work out of my students 40 years ago than I can expect today (and still keep my job). When I graduated from high school, there were four “recognitions” in the entire class of more than 100. My daughter regularly ignored various honor offers she received during her college years. I had to persuade her that $35 for a lifetime membership in Phi Beta Kappa was probably a worthwhile deal — she had dumped the letter.

At the time of the public exhibit of the Enola Gay (the plane that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima), a substantial number of respected historians sent a letter to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution objecting to the bias inherent in the exhibit. Their letter is one of the best statements of some historical facts (see their reference list) that support that there was no military rationale for using atomic weapons on Japan. Please read the letter (click the Comment) and evaluate the situation for yourself, in light of this informaton.

Click Comment to read my response to a friend’s blog post that discussed “middle class” spending habits:

I contributed the following posts to the discussion that followed Women Who Want to Want – NYTimes.com by Daniel Bergner (November 24, 2009). A mediocre article generated some interesting comments. I feel sorry for some very unhappy, frustrated and confused people out there. Societal pressure is no help and often can make things worse.

My first post:
I am not impressed with the article, which is basically a rehash of the impressions of one clinician in the area who gives no hard data. I am a long-time reader of the NYTimes and am disappointed with the superficiality of its current “science” reporting. The range of human sexuality is enormous and natural. Partners need experience to recognize compatibility and incompatibility (not wishful thinking). Be it necessary as breathing, a finer sense like an exquisite wine, or “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” (some feminists of the ‘60’s) – it’s fine if your partner is on the same page. Surprising number of wives complain their husbands have no sexual desire or understanding, particularly after a few years of marriage. Getting out of shape is often a factor.

My second post:
The breath and range of sexuality is enormous and yet “natural.” As I mentioned in a previous post, it is important that partners are matched in their degree of interest/disinterest and how they go about it. I met the love of my life about a decade ago. It all goes together for us — social activities, intellectual pursuits, intimacies, sex, loving care and concern, family. We work to make it happen, but it doesn’t feel like work. We are prepared to adjust to change, and part of my Quaker vow was to help my wife live her life fully and authentically, where ever it might lead her. We know we are together because we want to be. We’re just back from a post-Thanksgiving camping/hiking trip in the woods, and we had a great time in and out of the tent, with near freezing temperatures and heavy winds. We consider ourselves so fortunate.

My third post:
What’s this about having to “work to stay desirable”? To me, “desirable” means respecting yourself enough to keep your body healthy and fit. In the bedroom, who cares about the latest fashion in clothes? I’m the one who posted #188. We’re not kids. Staying desirable is no work, it’s fun!

I consider myself to be liberal in that I believe in freedom of thought and expression. Political Correctness hampers the thought process through the enforcement of linguistic conventions. I contributed the following post to the discussion that followed Political Correctness Revisited – NYTimes.com by Stanley Fish (November 30, 2009). The author was concerned that there are a disproportionate number of “liberals” in the liberal arts of universities and that they aren’t liberal anyhow and misuse tenure to push their own agenda. Other commentators offered explanations for why there would be relatively few conservatives in the liberal arts and relatively few liberals in business. Unfortunately, there are some so-called liberals that are not liberal in their thought process or dealings with others. There is ample evidence of this same fault among conservatives, also unfortunately. Many words such as “liberal” and “conservative” have become so politicized as to be essentially meaningless in any other context. Is “liberal” a particular political position, and if so, please define it?  Or is it simply open-mindedness to listen and consider all ideas, new or old.

My post:

Most academics are liberals, most CEOs and Chairmen of the Board are conservatives. Is this an imbalance that we need to remedy? In any case, we know where the money (and the power) resides in this country.

 Personally, inside class I am traditional. Outside of class I am untraditional, and I have injected significant ideas and controversies into my academic community. I feel strongly that this has been a positive contribution to the institution. I am grateful for tenure as it relates to academic freedom. For many years I was the sole support for a family of five, and I believe that my employment otherwise could have been jeopardized by some of my peaceful out-of-classroom activities.

May 17, 1948
“I’ll admit that it is rather difficult for me to look upon a conscientious objector with patience…While your four sons and my three nephews were risking their lives to save our government, and the things for which we stand, these people were virtually shooting them in the back.   I ran across one conscientious objector (Desmond Doss) that I really believe is all man…I decorated him with a Congressional Medal of Honor….the majority with whom I came in contact were just plain cowards and shirkers.”

(from   Eleanor and Harry, The Correspondence. 2002)

This letter was addressed to Eleanor Roosevelt in response to her request that he reconsider pardons for COs. Letter was saved but not sent, and he later mailed Eleanor a copy of the Attorney General’s statement regarding the report in question, including a personal note that there would be no review because the report was complete and he approved it

Doss was generally reviled during most of his military service as a medic because of his religious conscientious objection to killing. Even though there is absolutely no evidence that he ever failed to pursue his duties, he was generally considered cowardly simply on the basis of his anti-war beliefs. When he happened to be assigned a position of great danger and responded bravely, he became the public “exception.”   Had his assignments kept him shipboard, he would surely have remained one of Truman’s assumed cowards.

It could be said that to  hold to your principles when the world is against you is what requires the greatest bravery.