Honor Thy Mother

Recently I have been fighting with my mother. After a long prayer about the situation in my personal life, I have come to realize that the only way to deal with her is to tell her "I love you" regardless if what she says or does.

For Jesus said "love one another", and this applies especially to the commandment to honor my parents. Jesus also said "love your enemies" and dedicate yourself to their welfare. Yet my greatest enemy is always my selfish desires.

Even though I may mistake my mother for my enemy, the only true enemy is self-will.

So from this day forward I shall try to transform my selfishness into the selflessness as I listen to my mother in respectful silence.

Indeed, Love is the only response to a mother who misuses the commandment to "honor thy father and mother." For this is too the commandment of the Christ: to honor my mother by responding with love to anything she says or does.

All that I am capable of doing is to respond in a loving and compassionate manner, regardless of her behavior. For love conquers all, and my actions from this day forward shall reflect my determination to practice what I preach.

So shall I dedicate myself to honor my mother in a gentle and kind manner for the sake of our family.

Feminists are Sexist Too (satire)

Women are so picky about their mates.

Firstly, despite protest contrary, their ideal man must be financial stable, i.e. they must be the breadwinner.

Yet women have been emancipated. Sometimes they make more than men do.

Why is it that women demand a financial stable man, but a man usually marries a woman with no visible means of income, save what her parents might give to her as a wedding presents, or nothing if they foot the bill for the wedding?

A feminist would call the man a misogynist, yet most feminists who are heterosexual demand that the man to be an employee with a good job (doctors, lawyers, or CEO of a company that is green). She would be working, too.

I believe it is sexist for a woman to demand such a thing of a man. It is sexist because few feminists complain about men with jobs marrying women who have no job, save to be homemaker. If they actually were complaining, then why are they not protesting in your neighborhood.

If women want to wear the pants in their future family, then I see no reason why a man must have a job to meet the requirements of a women for her to marry, especially if she is employed at a good job.

He is not a burden to her, just as a woman without a job marrying an employed man is not a burden to him.

Therefore the fallacy that a man must be a breadwinner in order to marry a woman regardless of her employment status is clearly evident.

As well, that a man must be a breadwinner is also an artificial requirement by women which is inherently sexist and misanthropic.

Feminists, cut out the double standard. You are equal in sexism.

Journal Entry: February 4, 2013

Date of incident: February 4, 2013 Time: 1530-2200

Initial state of mind: at home, I was upset over having to go visit roommate before visiting mother with little time to do both.

Type of emotional upset: later at mother's place, I experienced anger and agitated state of mind due to choice made on hearing trigger phrase.

Briefly describe behavior: expressed desire to go home; did a lot of walking around without saying much, after initial upset, lasting perhaps 30 minutes.

Was it resolved? Yes, it was resolved by forgetting about it. See description below.

Main reason for incident: time mismanagement left me with no time to visit roommate and visit mother.

Recommendation: On days I visit my mother, I will only visit her.

Description of incident:

When I last visited my mother for supper, I was reading the newspaper at the kitchen table. Then my mother comes in and puts a tabloid in front of me, asking me to read it. I told her that I didn't want to read it. Later, she said that I must be upset over something to not want to read the paper. For about a half hour I am upset because of her saying that. When I look back on that incident I see that I was in the wrong BECAUSE I COULD HAVE CHOSEN NOT TO GET UPSET.

My mother made the request that "if I am upset, that it would be best not to come visit her." This is the trigger phrase.

After calming down somewhat, my mother and I had supper. At this point my brother comes upstairs and told us a joke, and we all laughed over it. Then I decided to forgive my mother but seeing as telling her that I forgive her is inappropriate, I acted as though I was over it.


After carefully reviewing this recent incident with my mother in my mind, I only fault myself for it. As long as I come up with justifications for getting upset with what my mother said to me, I am not doing our relationship any good.

Since family harmony is the common goal of my relationship with my mother, I refuse to blame my mother or myself.


After reviewing my memory of that day, it turns out that I was late getting to her place, and spent five minutes waiting before being let in by my brother.

According to what he told me, my mother decided to take a bath just before supper to avoid the inconvenience of doing so when she's tired.


My reason for taking responsibility for my actions in this case: I could have handled her request to read the tabloid she was reading better.

I didn't have make a big display of being upset when she said I was upset. That only confirms the fact.

I couldn't tell my mother that I was concerned with my roommate's situation because it's none of her business.

However I can feel repentant for choosing to get upset at my mother because spending a half hour being upset was not worth it at all.

So my mother is off the hook, and so am I.

The "Right" Decision

I decided in Grade 12 I'd never get married.

34 years later, with most of my classmates either single, married or divorced, IMHO that decision gets validated with the latest news headlines about youth crime and "swarmings", thanks to the State monitoring of child abuse in the family (a last resort of discipline) and the resulting "spare the rod, spoil the child" method of child rearing now being enforced.

Yet I sometimes get told that I've never truly lived a full life because I've never raised a family.

In retort I say "The Dalai Lama never raised a family, but he has saved his Tibetan culture, which in essence is his whole 'family'."

Thus, in choosing not to raise a family of my own, I chose to help and be of service to others. Indeed, in my eyes, the whole world is my "family".

Birds of a Feather Stick Together

One New Year's Day, my mother and I had a long discussion about how we treat each other. When she hears me talking in a manner that upsets her, she would use this argument to get me to behave:

"You talk as though you're smart, but you are not."

After she repeated this three times, I replied, "You know how this makes me feel? Like I am really this small."

I also told her that saying such things is like a form of brainwashing (emotional abuse).

When a person in authority, such as a parent, repeats such phrases, s/he is engaging in psychological warfare, even when it's within the family. The purpose of repeating such phrases is to break down the walls of defense of another family member, usually the child.

This is how a parent tries to control the behavior of her child. However, When a parent talks this way to her adult child, he will try to get her to understand the family dynamics by explaining to her how her words make him feel. For the purpose of getting a parent feedback is to help her see that her words do affect his self image.

In the case of my mother and I, her words may have made me feel as though I am weak and helpless when I was a child. Now that I am an adult, it just makes me feel small. Such belittling by the parent is done to help her feel as though she is in control.

During our discussion, my mother vowed to stay silent but broke that vow until I pointed it out to her. Finally, after I finished my New Year's Day dinner, I thanked her for it.

Later on that evening, my mother apologized for her bad behavior, and I reciprocated by apologizing for my bad behavior. Our mutual behavior during this long discussion would be called an argument by an outside observer.

In my eyes, "argument" implies a long discussion which two people engage with both sides presenting each other's main points. Such a discussion is engaged in so that each side is able to see the other person's point of view. The colloquial term for this aspect of the discussion is called "walking in my/your shoes".

Though the purpose of discussion is to communicate effectively, often through challenges such as inexperience, old age, social isolation and other factors, we see things solely from our point of view alone.

In order to "get the whole picture", it is necessary for people to communicate effectively and present differing points of view so that empathy is shared.

Hopefully, my mother will be aided by our discussion in understanding the family dynamics. For her bluntness is known to "rub people the wrong way."

While I admit that much of my parents' behavior has influenced me, I try not to be blunt and take my time in speaking since getting to the point abruptly tends to upset group harmony.

For now, I feel that New Year's Day was full of moments that enlightened me as to how I view myself and how that view has affected me.

Although my present circumstances reflects such a view, I do not believe that it is a permanent result of "how the way I was raised" but rather a temporary situation I call "dysfunctional self-image."

Additionally, I feel that my mother and I often have long discussions so that we are able to grow close to each other. My way of maintaining the familial ties that bind us together is to engage in argument with my mother so that we both respect each other as individuals.

I recall mentioning to her the phrase "birds of a feather stick together". However, I called this phrase a myth as it implies that like-minded people form a group based a mutual interest when often it is used to imply that a group are all alike.

It's a myth when used in this way because it also implies a "them versus us" mentality. For such a mentality arises when we confront an imagined adversary called "them" who we feel is not the same as us.

This is another case of the "self versus other" dichotomy which I have been writing about in previous articles.

Self and other are not actually adversaries at all.

Rather, when emotions arise, be it anger, hate, love, and other passionate feelings, a person encounters the "fight or flight" response to perceived threat from another person. This threat may be real or imagined, but the result is the same. To counteract this threat, each other engages in a "battle of words" so that the other side is provided with information that helps to determine the ultimate course of "the battle".

This battle is called "argument". Its purpose is to present each person's side in a manner that helps the other side become empathetic towards the other side, whilst helping the other side become of like mind.

In doing so, both side of an argument benefit. Rather than continuing with the myth of "them versus us", it is possible through reasoning and understanding to become like "birds of a feather" who "stick together".

For this is what long discussions I have with my mother are all about!

Children Ought to be Seen and Heard

In my opinion, to punish a child for talking back to a parent is unjustifiable, as by talking back, a child demonstrates two things: that s/he is an individual covered by the human rights proclamation in defense of free speech and that s/he is communicating.

When a parent rewards a child for being silent in the face of verbal abuse, that is mental cruelty and in essence, a form of child neglect, as the parent is neglecting the child's right to communicate freely.

This is the anatomy of rebellion in that child's teens.

Yet sadly, because a minor is in the custody of their caregivers, the rights of children are ignored, to their detriment.

Is it any wonder the things teenagers are doing today away from parents outrageous (gangs, murder, bullying)?

I say the seeds of rebellion and the child straying into the realm of decadent hedonism is tied to how the parent treats that child.

When you give them the opportunity to choice anything but hanging out with the wrong crowd, parents are not depriving children of having a life.

Rather, you are validating their right to be heard and seen.

If I had parents like that, then I'd want to share that story with the world.

Children ought to be seen and heard by their parents, not on the TV being busted for "mischief".

The Family that Sticks Together is Matriarchal

Overall, when the husband lets the wife rule the roost, that marriage lasts longer than where the family is actually an autocratic patriarchy where the father rules every aspect of his family's lives without flexibility.

Yet this depends on the State: if it is democratic, then it does not care who rules the family as long as it does not violate first social rules and norms specific to it and second UN conventions and the laws enacted to comply with international law.

Locally, within a democratic nation, if a family is ruled by rigid adherence to a patriarchal groupthink and variance to the State's laws are noticed through runs with the police and social workers, then the State reserves the right to remove children from potential or on-going abuse. Separation and divorce may then be used as remedies to an untenable situation.

The father may even be labelled as a wife-beater or as an aggressor in a domestic abuse legal case. Or worse, the State may use divorce as a tool to punish the autocratic father, including child support and alimony judgments.

In contrast, when the wife rules the roost, while she is not less likely to become autocratic, however, the State is less likely to label her an instigator of domestic abuse and few people will consider her to be a husband-beater; the police will even ridicule the husband for exposing it.

Despite this, family cohesiveness is stronger in one which is run in a matriarchal manner due to the stronger bonds maintained between family members.

This may be because in an autocracy, threat of force is the main tool used to maintain social cohesiveness, which actually may result in a weaker bond between family members. In a matriarchal family, there are less threats of force made to maintain cohesiveness; rather, a benign form of subversive psychology is enough to strengthen social cohesiveness within that family.

Thus, the family that sticks together longest is matriarchal at its roots. While this is an idealistic hypothesis, research of families indicates that it may be the rule more often than Western society cares to admit.

Laughter The Strongest Medicine on the Planet (humor)

"Laughter is one of the strongest medicines on the planet... If it's strong enough to kill an orgasm, surely it's strong enough to kill cancer." -- Lotus Weinstock

This is unauthorized memorial and remembrance dedicated to Lotus. It is based on my experiences watching two videos on Youtube, the first by Lotus and the second by her daughter, Lili, as well as reading Rob Weide's eulogy of her at his Duck Production website.

Fame for a comedian is like a degree to a doctor," Lotus would say. "You can't practice without it."

As a humorist, Lotus has the funny yet graceful humor, which tickles my funny bone. Her most funniest shtick was "How to Use Body Signals a Man Can't Resist". It was so funny that it endeared me to her.

As a humanist, she was willing to help out complete strangers, often homeless people, some of whom stole from her due to their own issues. Asked when she would stop to helping people who might steal from her, Lotus replied, "Until they don't need to steal anymore."

Later in life, Lotus remarked, "I used to want to save the world. Now I just want to leave the room with some dignity." Indeed, she lived in dignity, and her comedy acts treated others with dignity.

When a well-meaning deranged fan of hers wrote a threatening letter to Joan Rivers in response to Rivers declining to write a forward for Lotus' biography, only to have a bumbling private investigator morph her friend into a "drugged-out roommate" and incriminate her, just so Joan was getting her money's worth.

In actuality, Lotus was innocent of any wrong-doing and her friend was anything but a drug user.

Thanks, Lotus, your love lives on in the many lives you touched, through your caring towards strangers living in abject conditions, and through your comedy acts courtesy of Youtube.

"When I get to heaven's gate
and my life is reviewed,
I know that my saving grace
will be the love I have for you."

Lotus Weinstock, RIP 1943-1997

---

Reference:
A Lotus By Any Other Name: http://www.duckprods.com/weide/lotusremembrance.html
The Love I Have For You Playlist: http://www.youtube.com/user/sageb1#grid/user/13A28030411363DA
How to Use Body Signals A Man Can't Resist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXTDSGv4J8w
Lotus Weinstock: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3mI6AfstQM
Poetry in Motion LA 10-23-90 Lotus Weinstock: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BheUm_YiL0k

My grandparents

my paternal grandfather died a year before my brother was born.

My brother was born in 1957, me in 1958 and my sister in 1960.

My maternal grandfather died in 1972.

So both of my maternal grandparents were alive for most of my formative years as a child.

The influence of my maternal grandparents was subtle, since they did not speak English well enough to have an influence on my upbringing in Western culture.

However, I recall once after I had discovered the magic of magnets as a child, the magnet holding all my grandmother's pins. My grandfather doted on me, a bit, and have an argument over giving me the magnet. Grandmother wanted the magnet since it was a convenience. After hearing them argue, I told Grandfather, "Please stop arguing. I don't want the magnet anymore." This incident taught me a valuable lesson: when you desire something you like for yourself, do not want it so much that other people who love you argue over whether to give it to you or not.

When Grandmother reached her 80s her mind started to go. In her mid 90s, she had a few revelations: she kept dried orange peels in her room. My mom scolded her for that. The thing is, dried orange peels are essential to certain Asian dishes. Another time she had pots of water in her room. My mom scolded her over that one. My guess is Grandmother realized the lack of humidity in her room.

One time Grandmother opened the front door to let in the spirit of her son. Another time, she was going to go to a fine mansion where her son was waiting for her. She went outside with her suitcase, and stood for 20 minutes waiting.

I feel that the main thing is, that my mother could not empathize with her mother. Me, I don't believe for one moment that my grandmother was senile. I feel that my mom wanted her mother to follow her own sense of rational behavior along narrow confines that usually doesn't follow reality.

Another time, I had a dream where my dead grandfather who died in 1972 come to my bedroom, as though to remind me to be good.

As for my father's grandmother, she and her brother were born in Hawaii before the military invasion that led to the corporate annexation of Hawaii in the late 1800s. the long hours her father worked and the dissatisfaction in her life led my great grandmother to run away back to Japan with another man. Unable to look after two children on his own, Great-grandfather return to Japan with his kids, came into partnership with a married family friend who owned racehorses, and eventually was adopted into the childless couple's family. To this day I don't know the real last name of my grandmother.

Grandmother Koto grew up in a privileged life. She even had a servant look after her. Yet her mother kept an eye on her, and grew to envy the life of her daughter.

Can you imagine running away with another man, only to have your husband return, and gain a privileged life for their children, while you either get stuck with a dandy who's a drunk and a scoundrel?

So eventually my grandmother chose to be the picture bride of my grandfather, rather than have to endure her mother trying to pull the hairstrings of a young lady who never knew her real mother. I can almost imagine her mother confronting her, asking "Do you know who I am? I am your mother who bore me. Do you not know me, daughter?" And my grandmother at age 9 wondering who this lady bothering her is, the male servant dragging her away as she cries, "You're still my daughter!!"

The real cincher will be the stories I can tell about my maternal grandparents in Japan, based on the domicile records I had researched and photocopied. Now there's stories that will make you wonder.

My grandfather had a younger brother who was the playboy in the family. He was made the heir when my grandfather refused the arranged marriage and picked the nice young girl of a proper Buddhist family. He declared "That's the girl I'll marry." It's unknown what happened to the spurn girl.

My grandfather had two sisters lived as living at the family home. The elder sister is recorded to have left to go work as a servant for what I speculate was an older gentleman, because the records show she brought back part of his estate. She continued to work as a servant for that particular family house. Later she married, only to divorce her husband. She never remarried. Another sister married a man to escape her life in Hiroshima. She left that man due to drink and returned within weeks she had married a decent man, who - no surprise - also drank. Later she divorced him.

My mother recalls that the daughters of her playboy uncle all became geisha. One of her cousins had many abortions due to her promiscuous lifestyle. My mother recalls that her uncle encouraged his daughters to be geisha. They used to tease and put down my mother a lot. The eldest son volunteered in the army and lost his life in battle. That was fortunate, since otherwise he would have followed his father as geisha chaser and drunk.

It's not surprising that my grandmother's father, mother and relatives lived stable lives in stable relationships. No divorces, no family discord.