Incompatible

When I was a college freshman I took a vocational test (Strong Interest Inventory) that offered a score of 0-60 or 70 on your compatibility for certain professions. Although it turns out that teaching was a perfect fit for me (maybe not you, my student, but me, at least), I don’t recall that career score as being spectacularly high. What I do recall is that I was the only one of my friends with a NEGATIVE (below 0!) score on not one, but three potential careers. Notably leading the pack: police officer. (The other two were, not surprisingly to those who know me, minister and industrial arts teacher.)

One of the reasons I have so much respect for police officers is that I know full well it is a job I could never do, even poorly, much less at all. We may not share many personality traits, but what teachers and police do share is an under-appreciated, under-compensated, highly demanding job (that too many critics think they can do). Policing and protection take a certain personality type (and skills). And while there is no such thing as a typical teacher (or police officer, for that matter), I would suggest that in general the people best suited for teaching are poorly suited for policing, and vice versa. When I think back on the many teachers I have known, both as a professional and a student, the ones who seemed most focused on crowd, sorry, classroom, control often were the least inspiring in the classroom.

Which brings me to my main point, if you haven’t already guessed: you generally don’t want men and women best suited for policing teaching your children – it’s a poor fit. It may be well-intentioned, but “training” and arming teachers is a spectacularly bad idea; it has gained traction only out of a desperate sense of “We have to do something (but not anything that might interfere with our ability to arm ourselves with high capacity magazine weapons)!”

We all like to think we’d respond like a hero under fire, but the Parkland shooting shows that isn’t true, even for those armed and trained to respond. There’s a lot of macho bravado in this country (we’re not alone there, of course), and I enjoy those books and movies as much as the next person, but Stephen Crane (Red Badge of Courage) gave a more realistic portrayal. I'm guessing that most military veterans who have come under fire on our behalf (thank you for that) can provide examples of fellow soldiers who, shall we say, "blinked" under that kind of pressure.

And I am not criticizing them, not even the armed deputies who stayed outside the school while the shooter went on his rampage – disappointing, yes, but they wanted to go home to their families, too. I’d like to think I’d be like the teachers in school shootings who shielded their students and forfeited their lives in the process, but what I’d like to think and what I would really do is a scenario I hope I never have to encounter. However, as I head back for one more sub gig at Lindbergh HS in May, what I really hope is that as a country we have started to move toward actions that make such a life or death decision less likely. But pretending that training and arming teachers will do that is nothing more than a convenient fiction.

Remember the Law of Unintended Consequences as you ask yourself, “What could possibly go wrong?” Feel free to start the list below.

Ask Less, Get More

Kevin Horrigan wrote a great article today in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. It was something I never thought of before.

I know we teachers used to (probably still do) complain loudly and often about how society was dumping all of its problems on our doorstep, that we were expected to be parent, social worker, spiritual advisor (non-sectarian, of course, although I’ve no doubt some strayed outside those lines), sex educator, counselor, etc., etc., as well as teacher. As much as we complained, though, we kind of knew it came with the territory, and we were, more or less, prepared for those aspects of the job. I like to think that the best of us (at least at The Place), for all our griping, embraced and even welcomed those challenges.

Until I read Horrigan’s column this morning, however, I had never even considered the possibility that something similar has been happening to our police officers for many years now. According to Horrigan, and I (obviously) agree, we are expecting police to not just enforce the laws and solve crimes, but to enforce social norms and solve social problems.

With no intended offense to those men and women who are doing a job that I couldn’t handle (I had enough trouble enforcing classroom discipline), I don’t think most of them are suited for the demands of social service in terms of the personality of people attracted to law enforcement vs. those attracted to education or social work. I might be wrong, but I would suggest those who want to do the (important) job of social service are not heading to the police academy but down a different educational path. I do know that when I took the Strong Interest Inventory as a college freshman, my scores for teacher (well, not industrial arts teacher) and police officer were at the opposite ends of the scale.

It is very easy to criticize police officers, but even if, as is true for some teachers, it is deserved, I refrain from doing so because no way could I do that demanding job. Add to the demands the element of risk that cannot be ignored, dumping the thorniest problems of modern society on our police departments is not only unfair but unwise.

Finally, adding a point emanating from my pragmatic bent, it is also economically inefficient. One of the reasons police departments are stretched so thin for money is because we’re asking, no forcing, them to spend their limited resources on tasks that are not, or at least should not be, in their purview.

If we want more, or better, from our law enforcement community, perhaps we should consider asking for less. (I would argue that the same holds true for education, as well.) If you have not read the article, I urge you to do so, and am adding the link again: http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/the-platform/horrigan-in-tribal-america-too-many-problems-are-dropped-on/article_e9e0523d-e6f9-53b8-9e4f-626c86136cbb.html

Trying to Teach Pigs to Sing

OR Why I Haven’t Been Writing

Regular readers and followers have probably noticed that I’ve been on an extended hiatus from this blog, as well as my others. 

The softball blog will actually pick up as we start to move into that season (really it’s already begun), but that’s a specialized project for a limited audience. I may also revisit my Hancock blog from time to time, but I need to generate more positive feelings for even that to happen.

You might wonder why. Or you might not care, but I’m going to share my reasons anyway. Actually, that’s not completely true. I have started several pieces, all of which sit as drafts, awaiting motivation to polish and publish. Others are percolating in my brain, as it drifts from one dark cloud to the next.

The fact is, that for some time now I have been consistently too depressed about the state of political and world affairs to add my thoughts to the increasing cacophony of certitude pervading social media. Maybe I should just give up Facebook, where people actually cheered the entrance of Donald Trump into the presidential race. That is just one of the thread topics I don’t add on to, because it wouldn’t do any good. I mean, if you take that bombastic buffoon seriously, what could I possibly say that would make you think (differently).

Now we have the posts about Charleston. Apparently there were insufficient victims victims to make some people consider that this tragedy is symptomatic of a problem worth solving, or worth at least discussing solutions. Even worse, many of those same people so resistant to recognizing that there IS a problem and that we need to actively search for a solution have also regularly offered posts suggesting that we have solved the problem of racism in this country, that racism is no more than an excuse for a lack of success.

I refuse to swim in those threads either. What would be the point? People with that mindset truly have set minds. Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their mind cannot change anything. — George Bernard Shaw

I remember a button we peddled back in the day to raise money for political candidates; of course, that was before we had solved sexism and sex discrimination, like we’ve solved racism. The button read: Don’t try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Sales were brisk, but back in those younger, still idealistic days, I confess that I nevertheless DID keep trying to teach pigs to sing. Today, as I read the proud displays of ignorance on Facebook and elsewhere, I realize that I also did, indeed, waste my time and (probably) annoy the pigs.

For any number of reasons, I have narrowed my focus. The most important reason? I have a granddaughter (thus the Fathers Day hook for this piece) for whom I would throw myself in front of a train. She is my focus now. Because she will need her family and would be negatively impacted by the loss of any of those people who are, and will continue to be, her safety net, I will do whatever I can for them, as well. Not that this represents any sacrifice on my part, because I also love them.

But I’m done trying to teach pigs to sing, so don’t expect a whole lot of new content from this space, at least until I become less disheartened. I don’t know when that will be. I may be sporadically and randomly inspired to throw in a thought or two, but only if it doesn’t take away from the (increasingly limited) energy that I’m saving for one little girl.

On the Eve of the State of the Union...

… which I won’t watch, again. As little point as I see in using my time listening to political punching and counter-punching, from a lame duck president this reality-TV drama seems an even bigger waste of my time. Then tonight and tomorrow we’ll be treated to being forced choose which narrow slice of right or left wing real estate we’re going to inhabit.

I never liked forced choice questions, A or B, True or False, Good or Evil. I don’t live in a black and white world; mine is a (fuzzy) shades-of-grey world-view. Thus, I find there are no easy answers and am increasingly suspect of those who claim to have a monopoly on the truth, be they Islamic radicals or Fundamentalist Christians, right-wing Republicans or left-wing Democrats, Clint Eastwood or Michael Moore …..

Life is no longer simple (if it ever was), probably (at least in part) because people are complicated. Seldom, if ever, do we really have an either/or situation, at least when it comes to how we feel about something. While our personal choices may often appear to be a forced choice, if we’re honest with ourselves we’ve had a variety of paths to take before arriving at H-Hour.

Why do I have to go “all in” on an issue? Are you really telling me I can’t support both the 2^nd Amendment and background checks? That I must pick between the 1^st Amendment freedom of (pick one of the 5) and reasonable limits that protect society? Can I not support the police and those who are concerned about whether “black lives matter”? Can I not appreciate the service and sacrifice of our military men and women and have concerns about where and why they are deployed?

On these big issues we seem to be at the mercy of the absolutists and extremists who take no prisoners, admit no middle ground; they manipulate issues and events trying to force the majority of us into their particular small corners. We are also at the mercy of those political consultants who energize voters and contributions by polarizing every issue. And we wonder why Congress can’t find any middle ground?

I almost envy those who live in their narrow black and white worlds. It cuts down on listening, thinking, analyzing, concluding. I’ll finish by sharing a meme that has been posted by both conservatives AND liberals and the cartoon (above) that seems to sum it all up.* Have we finally found something we can all agree on? Nah….

* You might also try to check the cartoon on the mast-head.

Cruise Diary 14: Days 8-11, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Mexico

It would appear that the Pacific side of these countries is more affluent than the Caribbean side. Not that you will want to go house hunting any time soon, but still, not nearly as depressing as what we saw last year.

As noted previously, Costa Rica is proud of its accomplishments and heritage. However, the one constant on this trip is that every guide feels the same way about his (or her) country. It truly irks me when the drum-beaters for “American Exceptionalism” fail to realize that most people, or at least those with a sense of country, believe that their country, too, is exceptional. Those same loud voices are also critical of the trend to eliminate winners and losers, the trophies for all attitude. “We can’t all be winners.”

I get that, but comparing your country to mine isn’t even a parlor game and what rules there may be come from those who want to stack the deck so that their homeland becomes the winner. National pride can’t only be good when it’s ours. Who is to say that we’re better than anyone else? I’d suggest we’d be better off treating our attitude toward our country like golf, and working on just being the best that we can, knowing there is always room for improvement, without the need to “beat” some other country. In the unlikely event that I could beat you (or anyone) in a golf match, it still wouldn’t mean I was any good.

Being better than the competition doesn’t mean you’re good. Being louder than the other side doesn’t mean you’re right. Bob Dylan long ago got it right when he said, “Not to climb up any higher but rather drag you down the hole that he’s in.” We should be cheering these countries as they work to develop their economies, education, social services, etc., even if not always the same way we would prefer. Instead, the American Exceptionalists seem to want to put a ceiling on others’ ambition so that we can wave our foam fingers and shout, “We’re #1!” to justify any action we take. Let’s at least not be offended or surprised when we get a different finger in return.

On a slightly different note, I must admit it was a bit disconcerting to see all the soldiers with big guns on our last two stops. I know I’m in the minority here, but being surrounded by armed people, even if it’s obviously the military doing its job, does NOT make me feel safer. It only makes me wonder when they’re going to use them, and on whom. And if you’re a civilian toting a gun, well, hey, you may know you’re not crazy or a threat to me, but I sure as hell don’t. Quite frankly, your need to display your weaponry is enough to make me wonder.

But back to foreign travel, we remember seeing lots of guns and armed security in Europe, especially Italy, almost 40 years ago. Didn’t make us feel safer then, either.

In any case, we’re happy to be trading the snow at home for the 80+ degree temperatures here, at least temporarily. And now a few random pictures: