Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Held Up Without a Gun - Introduction

For me, starting at the beginning often feels like a monumental task – with lots of things, actually. However, usually once I do, I get rolling pretty quickly and the rest falls into place. This has been true throughout my life. Facing a giant task, my response has often been to delay and avoid, subconsciously hoping whatever it is will go away. It never does.
I enjoy the process of therapy. Some call it counseling. To me it’s neither, really but if it were one over the other, it’s something far more therapeutic than anything else. I have never seen a shrink of any sort to be told what to do or to be given exercises to help me cope with a challenge or situation. I have gone, or go to be heard. We all want to be heard. Some of us want to be heard because we feel as if we aren’t. I want to be heard in part because I’m not, yet I also don’t talk to those closest to me. I wonder sometimes if I resent some of the closest people to me for not talking to me while pushing them away all at the same time. Paying someone to talk to me; actually, paying someone to listen to me seems like the fairest and most just exchange. Does this mean I see myself as unworthy or uninteresting? I doubt it. I think it’s more a matter of feeling like what I need to say is too much for those closest to me to hear. Besides, I’ve said most of it before, albeit gradually and in real time.
So I figured I’d start this little section of this little webpage for this little corner of my life. I’ve tried this before and I have stalled under the weight of the subject matter. This is one little corner of my life, but it’s the darkest and heaviest corner. It consumes most of my thoughts and shows up in my dreams nearly every night. This corner of my life has triggers that can ruin a day or send me into a dark place for a while. It never seems to change and only seems manageable when I am talking about it. My hope here is that I will continue ‘talking’ about it and that will somehow bring some peace to this little corner of my life. Not totally trusting my ability to keep up and not surrender to the pain that will resurface as a result of my reflection, I begin this story with three strategies:
1)      I am writing five submissions before publishing my first. I want to have some traction under me and some wind at my back before starting to tell a story that could break down. I figure by the time I have five submissions in the bank I will have developed some momentum.

2)      I am not telling anyone that this blog/website is even here until the fifth submission is posted. Again, the genesis of this is rooted in not trusting myself to stay the course of what is sure to be a challenging and emotional process.

3)      This site is not devoted to this corner of my life. This section of this effort will be one of many. I intend to write about what runs through my head. So much of what I post to Facebook or discuss with friends is about politics. I have written extensively about politics in the past. I love American politics and that certainly won’t change. But I want to focus on the rest of it. So the discussion of this part of my life will only be part of this website. I am  hesitantly inviting you into the part of my life I most avoid, but it’s the part of my life that most consumes me, haunts me and makes up who I am. Actually that should read, ‘who I am now’ because this part of my life has changed who I am and who I could have been.
So if you know me at all you know what this ‘part’ or ‘corner’ of my life is. If I were to scan my ‘Facebook friends’ which is a sad exercise – because of the place that social networking has claimed in our lives, not because of the people on that list, I would guess that most of those ‘friends’ know nothing of who I really am. Trust me when I say, there is nothing exciting about starting this chapter. I do so because I feel a need, and have felt a need for a long time that this story has to be told. I feel like I’m hiding. I feel that because I am. I feel like I am avoiding. Again, I am. I feel like I am allowing only a version of myself to be known. I am. I feel eaten up and beaten down as a result.
This will be my attempt to survive this part of my life so that this corner doesn’t collapse and crush me underneath. I owe it to many people to attempt to drag myself up, including myself. This site is called, ‘so cynical’ because that is how many people view me. And, I am cynical. No question about it. Part of my cynicism is rooted in a quest to be funny or ironic. The rest of it is the real me, part who I am by nature and part the version of me I’ve rusted into.
Thanks for joining me for this new phase of therapy.

Held Up Without a Gun - Preface

“Joke's on me, It's gonna be okay
If I can just get through this lonesome day”


The story I am about to present is mine. It is pathetic, sad, embarrassing, painful, predictable, shocking and at times funny. I’m not sure why I want to tell it, but I do. I am not hoping to inspire anyone or move anybody by anything I have to say. I am not trying to reveal myself to you and there is much of this that I’d rather no one know.
I realized something about myself the other night when my Golden Retriever, Nelson jumped up on the couch to sit next to me. He moved in close and propped his head on my lap. His big brown eyes expressed nothing but love and acceptance – each unconditional.
 I moved Nelson off one me. I pushed him on to the cushion next to me. When he inched closer I re-established my space. Then it instantly hit me that this is pretty much how I operate with most of my life with many people – some of which I love deeply. I wanted Nelson in the room. I even wanted him close by, just not touching me. I do this with people. Maybe I do this with you. I want you around, I may even want you near but I probably keep you at a safe distance. Why, I’m not totally sure. Perhaps this is my effort to start the process of changing that.
While this is my story, there are lots of other people involved; real people with real lives. I don’t want to hurt anyone at all – even the ones it may seem like I should want to hurt. So most of the names in what you’ll read have been changed except for mine.
The part of my motive that I do understand is that I want my daughters to have my account of what has happened since the fall of 2006. The proper telling of that story requires going back in time, so there will be lots that happened before them. It’s all relevant.
Most of this focuses on my marriage, separation and divorce. It has been the most thoroughly horrible experience I could ever imagine. I wouldn’t wish my experience on to anyone. Unlike most divorces and custody battles, mine got significantly worse as time went on. While I take my fair share for the failure of my marriage, the only responsibility I take for what has happened since is in the undeserved grace and benefit of doubt I provided my ex-wife. Continually and naively I believed what she told me about wanting me to be a part of the lives of our daughters. Continually and naively I agreed to “slow the process down” or “forego my visit” so that our daughters could adjust. I was hoodwinked and robbed of my children. I was held up without a gun.
The title I’m using is a little known Bruce Springsteen song. I think the title (not the song’s lyrics) perfectly describes what’s gone on.
My girls have not been told a decent thing about me in more than six years. No question that friends or neighbors or teachers who remember me fondly have said nice things about me in their company, but there is no doubt what so ever that their mother has never supported a healthy view of me and has contributed mightily to the destruction and alienation of my relationship with our children.
There is a lot to tell here and I can already tell that the telling of this story is going to be all over the map. It won’t be a total chronological story. I will try to keep things interesting but will not run each post through a master edit.
I can promise you that everything you read will be 100% true. I will not speculate without telling you that I am. I will be as transparent as I can. I feel like that’s important.
I want my daughters to hear my story. I really want to hear theirs. My hope is that one day we will sit together and have a good cry over this painful chapter of our lives. Right now, though the damage that has been inflicted upon my relationships with my girls is significant.

Today is our oldest daughter’s seventeenth birthday. I sent her a card and a present. I also sent her a text message wishing her a happy birthday. This morning I called to say the same thing. I recording answered my call that told me that my number has been blocked on her phone and will not accept my calls.
There has never been abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction or abandonment. I taught each of my girls to ride their bikes. I volunteered in their classrooms every week. I coached their soccer teams and softball teams. They heard ‘I love you’ multiple times a day – every day. I read to them before bed. I cooked for them, fed them and cleaned up after them. I was never less than fifty per cent of the parenting that took place in our home. My crime, the one that has me banished with a blocked phone number and no communication is that I had the nerve to tell their mother that I couldn’t live with her any longer.
I suspect that if and when my ex reads this that she will explode with a vengeance and set out to “destroy” me or my reputation. She’s too late. Everything you will read here has contributed to the destruction of who I was a long time back. Writing this and telling this story is my attempt to claim some measure of who I was back.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

This Week in Douchebaggery

Phil Mickelson

The champion golfer said this week he might have to move out of the Golden State because of recent hikes in federal and state taxes on the wealthy.

"If you add up all the federal and you look at the disability and the unemployment and the Social Security and the state, my tax rate's 62, 63 percent," he was quoted as saying in Yahoo Sports. "So I've got to make some decisions on what I'm going to do."

Mickelson's tax rate, however, is closer to 51%, according to the Tax Foundation and California tax experts. His winnings and endorsements, which Sports Illustrated pegged at nearly $61 million in its most recent annual estimate, subject him to the highest marginal rates for married couples.

Poor Phil. I think I speak for many Californians when I say, tax rates in Arizona are much lower and that creepy grin of yours will stand out much less. Just go, Phil. Leave.

Manti Te'o

Te’o showed up on the set of Katie Couric this week attempting for the first time to help us all make sense of his confusing, pathetic tale of a two year love affair with a woman who never existed.
Of course his best girl turned out to be a man with a fabulous falsetto. With a straight face Te’o asked us all to believe that he reacted to being embarrassed when discovering his dead girlfriend was never anything – much less female.

Couric asked lots of tough first questions but exactly zero difficult follow-ups. For example, when Te’o denied being gay her follow-up should have been, “seriously, c’mon, Manti. You’re gay, right?”

On the list of questions never asked were, “why did you not visit your girlfriend after her car accident?”

“Why did you not visit your girlfriend during chemo?”

“Why did you not attend your girlfriend’s funeral?”
My money is squarely on Te'o being gay. I don't anticipate we'll ever see him come out if he is gay, though. Imagine being a Mormon football player at a Catholic university. That has to be the darkest, coldest closet ever.

Rand Paul
Kentucky Senator told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that he would have fired her over the Benghazi attack and aftermath if he were President.
While Clinton should be applauded for not doing a spit take all over the front row, Paul should be openly mocked for entertaining such a fantasy while awake.
The footage will certainly find its way onto Paul's campaign ads from now until he retires from the Senate. The fine folks of Kentucky will be impressed with how he took on that liberal lady.


Kirill Bartashevitch
Kirill Bartashevitch, 52, of St. Paul was arrested and charged with two counts of felony terroristic threats for allegedly threatening his daughter and wife with an assault rifle.
Turns out Bartashevitch was making a point to his fifteen year-old daughter after she brought home an uninspired report card (2 B’s and 2 A’s)
 

 

Selling a New Generation on Guns
A junior shooter receiving tips on a military rifle last fall from an Army marksmanship instructor at a clinic at Fort Benning, Ga. Youth shooting clinics and competitions often receive financial support or supplies from firearms-related businesses.

BY Mike McIntire
NEW YORK TIMES

Threatened by long-term declining participation in shooting sports, the firearms industry has poured millions of dollars into a broad campaign to ensure its future by getting guns into the hands of more, and younger, children.

The industry’s strategies include giving firearms, ammunition and cash to youth groups; weakening state restrictions on hunting by young children; marketing an affordable military-style rifle for “junior shooters” and sponsoring semiautomatic-handgun competitions for youths; and developing a target-shooting video game that promotes brand-name weapons, with links to the Web sites of their makers.

The pages of Junior Shooters, an industry-supported magazine that seeks to get children involved in the recreational use of firearms, once featured a smiling 15-year-old girl clutching a semiautomatic rifle. At the end of an accompanying article that extolled target shooting with a Bushmaster AR-15 — an advertisement elsewhere in the magazine directed readers to a coupon for buying one — the author encouraged youngsters to share the article with a parent.

“Who knows?” it said. “Maybe you’ll find a Bushmaster AR-15 under your tree some frosty Christmas morning!”

The industry’s youth-marketing effort is backed by extensive social research and is carried out by an array of nonprofit groups financed by the gun industry, an examination by The New York Times found. The campaign picked up steam about five years ago with the completion of a major study that urged a stronger emphasis on the “recruitment and retention” of new hunters and target shooters.

The overall objective was summed up in another study, commissioned last year by the shooting sports industry, that suggested encouraging children experienced in firearms to recruit other young people. The report, which focused on children ages 8 to 17, said these “peer ambassadors” should help introduce wary youngsters to guns slowly, perhaps through paintball, archery or some other less intimidating activity.

“The point should be to get newcomers started shooting something, with the natural next step being a move toward actual firearms,” said the report, which was prepared for the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Hunting Heritage Trust.

Firearms manufacturers and their two primary surrogates, the National Rifle Association of America and the National Shooting Sports Foundation, have long been associated with high-profile battles to fend off efforts at gun control and to widen access to firearms. The public debate over the mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., and elsewhere has focused largely on the availability of guns, along with mental illness and the influence of violent video games.

Little attention has been paid, though, to the industry’s youth-marketing initiatives. They stir passionate views, with proponents arguing that introducing children to guns can provide a safe and healthy pastime, and critics countering that it fosters a corrosive gun culture and is potentially dangerous.

The N.R.A. has for decades given grants for youth shooting programs, mostly to Boy Scout councils and 4-H groups, which traditionally involved single-shot rimfire rifles, BB guns and archery. Its $21 million in total grants in 2010 was nearly double what it gave out five years earlier.

Newer initiatives by other organizations go further, seeking to introduce children to high-powered rifles and handguns while invoking the same rationale of those older, more traditional programs: that firearms can teach “life skills” like responsibility, ethics and citizenship. And the gun industry points to injury statistics that it says show a greater likelihood of getting hurt cheerleading or playing softball than using firearms for fun and sport.

A Utah gun show last year. The gun industry spends millions promoting recreational shooting for children.


Still, some experts in child psychiatry say that encouraging youthful exposure to guns, even in a structured setting with an emphasis on safety, is asking for trouble. Dr. Jess P. Shatkin, the director of undergraduate studies in child and adolescent mental health at New York University, said that young people are naturally impulsive and that their brains “are engineered to take risks,” making them ill suited for handling guns.

“There are lots of ways to teach responsibility to a kid,” Dr. Shatkin said. “You don’t need a gun to do it.”

Steve Sanetti, the president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said it was better to instruct children in the safe use of a firearm through hunting and target shooting, and engage them in positive ways with the heritage of guns in America. His industry is well positioned for the task, he said, but faces an unusual challenge: introducing minors to activities that involve products they cannot legally buy and that require a high level of maturity.

Ultimately, Mr. Sanetti said, it should be left to parents, not the government, to decide if and when to introduce their children to shooting and what sort of firearms to use.

“It’s a very significant decision,” he said, “and it involves the personal responsibility of the parent and personal responsibility of the child.”

Trying to Reverse a Trend

The shooting sports foundation, the tax-exempt trade association for the gun industry, is a driving force behind many of the newest youth initiatives. Its national headquarters is in Newtown, just a few miles from Sandy Hook Elementary School, where Adam Lanza, 20, used his mother’s Bushmaster AR-15 to kill 20 children and 6 adults last month.

The foundation’s $26 million budget is financed mostly by gun companies, associated businesses and the foundation’s SHOT Show, the industry’s annual trade show, according to its latest tax return.

Although shooting sports and gun sales have enjoyed a rebound recently, the long-term demographics are not favorable, as urbanization, the growth of indoor pursuits like video games and changing cultural mores erode consumer interest. Licensed hunters fell from 7 percent of the population in 1975 to fewer than 5 percent in 2005, according to federal data. Galvanized by the declining share, the industry redoubled its efforts to reverse the trend about five years ago.

The focus on young people has been accompanied by foundation-sponsored research examining popular attitudes toward hunting and shooting. Some of the studies used focus groups and telephone surveys of teenagers to explore their feelings about guns and people who use them, and offered strategies for generating a greater acceptance of firearms.



The cover of a study exploring how to increase youth participation with guns.


The Times reviewed more than a thousand pages of these studies, obtained from gun industry Web sites and online archives, some of them produced as recently as last year. Most were prepared by consultants retained by the foundation, and at least one was financed with a grant from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

In an interview, Mr. Sanetti said the youth-centered research was driven by the inevitable “tension” the industry faces, given that no one under 18 can buy a rifle or a shotgun from a licensed dealer or even possess a handgun under most circumstances. That means looking for creative and appropriate ways to introduce children to shooting sports.



“There’s nothing alarmist or sinister about it,” Mr. Sanetti said. “It’s realistic.”

Pointing to the need to “start them young,” one study concluded that “stakeholders such as managers and manufacturers should target programs toward youth 12 years old and younger.”

“This is the time that youth are being targeted with competing activities,” it said. “It is important to consider more hunting and target-shooting recruitment programs aimed at middle school level, or earlier.”

Aware that introducing firearms to young children could meet with resistance, several studies suggested methods for smoothing the way for target-shooting programs in schools. One cautioned, “When approaching school systems, it is important to frame the shooting sports only as a mechanism to teach other life skills, rather than an end to itself.”

In another report, the authors warned against using human silhouettes for targets when trying to recruit new shooters and encouraged using words and phrases like “sharing the experience,” “family” and “fun.” They also said children should be enlisted to prod parents to let them join shooting activities: “Such a program could be called ‘Take Me Hunting’ or ‘Take Me Shooting.’

” The industry recognized that state laws limiting hunting by children could pose a problem, according to a “Youth Hunting Report” prepared by the shooting sports foundation and two other groups. Declaring that “the need for aggressive recruitment is urgent,” the report said a primary objective should be to “eliminate or reduce age minimums.” Still another study recommended allowing children to get a provisional license to hunt with an adult, “perhaps even before requiring them to take hunter safety courses.”

The effort has succeeded in a number of states, including Wisconsin, which in 2009 lowered the minimum hunting age to 10 from 12, and Michigan, where in 2011 the age minimum for hunting small game was eliminated for children accompanied by an adult mentor. The foundation cited statistics suggesting that youth involvement in hunting, as well as target shooting, had picked up in recent years amid the renewed focus on recruitment.

Gun companies have spent millions of dollars to put their recruitment strategies into action, either directly or through the shooting sports foundation and other organizations. The support takes many forms.

The Scholastic Steel Challenge, started in 2009, introduces children as young as 12 to competitive handgun shooting using steel targets. Its “platinum” sponsors include the shooting sports foundation, Smith & Wesson and Glock, which donated 60 9-millimeter semiautomatic pistols, according to the group’s Web site.

The site features a quote from a gun company executive praising the youth initiative and saying that “anyone in the firearms industry that overlooks its potential is missing the boat.”

Larry Potterfield, the founder of MidwayUSA, one of the nation’s largest sellers of shooting supplies and a major sponsor of the Scholastic Steel Challenge, said he did not fire a handgun until he was 21, adding that they “are the most difficult guns to learn to shoot well.” But, he said, he sees nothing wrong with children using them.

“Kids need arm strength and good patience to learn to shoot a handgun well,” he said in an e-mail, “and I would think that would come in the 12-14 age group for most kids.”

Another organization, the nonprofit Youth Shooting Sports Alliance, which was created in 2007, has received close to $1 million in cash, guns and equipment from the shooting sports foundation and firearms-related companies, including ATK, Winchester and Sturm, Ruger & Company, its tax returns show. In 2011, the alliance awarded 58 grants. A typical grant: 23 rifles, 4 shotguns, 16 cases of ammunition and other materials, which went to a Michigan youth camp.

The foundation and gun companies also support Junior Shooters magazine, which is based in Idaho and was started in 2007. The publication is filled with catchy advertisements and articles about things like zombie targets, pink guns and, under the heading “Kids Gear,” tactical rifle components with military-style features like pistol grips and collapsible stocks.

Gun companies often send new models to the magazine for children to try out with adult supervision. Shortly after Sturm, Ruger announced in 2009 a new, lightweight semiautomatic rifle that had the “look and feel” of an AR-15 but used less expensive .22-caliber cartridges, Junior Shooters received one for review. The magazine had three boys ages 14 to 17 fire it and wrote that they “had an absolute ball!”


An advertisement from the online Junior Shooters magazine.


Junior Shooters’ editor, Andy Fink, acknowledged in an editorial that some of his magazine’s content stirred controversy.

“I have heard people say, even shooters that participate in some of the shotgun shooting sports, such things as, ‘Why do you need a semiautomatic gun for hunting?’ ” he wrote. But if the industry is to survive, he said, gun enthusiasts must embrace all youth shooting activities, including ones “using semiautomatic firearms with magazines holding 30-100 rounds.”

In an interview, Mr. Fink elaborated. Semiautomatic firearms are actually not weapons, he said, unless someone chooses to hurt another person with them, and their image has been unfairly tainted by the news media. There is no legitimate reason children should not learn to safely use an AR-15 for recreation, he said.

“They’re a tool, not any different than a car or a baseball bat,” Mr. Fink said. “It’s no different than a junior shooting a .22 or a shotgun. The difference is in the perception of the viewer.”

The Weapon of Choice

The AR-15, the civilian version of the military’s M-16 and M-4, has been aggressively marketed as a cool and powerful step up from more traditional target and hunting rifles. But its appearance in mass shootings — in addition to Newtown, the gun was also used last year in the movie theater massacre in Aurora, Colo., and the attack on firefighters in Webster, N.Y. — has prompted calls for tighter restrictions. The AR-15 is among the guns included in a proposed ban on a range of semiautomatic weapons that was introduced in the Senate last week.

Given the gun’s commercial popularity, it is perhaps unsurprising that AR-15-style firearms have worked their way into youth shooting programs. At a “Guns ’n Grillin” weekend last fall, teenagers at a Boy Scout council in Virginia got to shoot AR-15s. They are used in youth competitions held each year at a National Guard camp in Ohio, and in “junior clinics” taught by Army or Marine marksmanship instructors, some of them sponsored by gun companies or organizations they support.

ArmaLite, a successor company to the one that developed the AR-15, is offering a similar rifle, the AR-10, for the grand prize in a raffle benefiting the Illinois State Rifle Association’s “junior high-power” team, which uses AR-15s in its competitions. Bushmaster has offered on its Web site a coupon worth $350 off the price of an AR-15 “to support and encourage junior shooters.”
A discount coupon on a gun maker's Web site.

Military-style firearms are prevalent in a target-shooting video game and mobile app called Point of Impact, which was sponsored by the shooting sports foundation and Guns & Ammo magazine. The game — rated for ages 9 and up in the iTunes store — allows players to shoot brand-name AR-15 rifles and semiautomatic handguns at inanimate targets, and it provides links to gun makers’ Web sites as well as to the foundation’s “First Shots” program, intended to recruit new shooters.

Upon the game’s release in January 2011, foundation executives said in a news release that it was one of the industry’s “most unique marketing tools directed at a younger audience.” Mr. Sanetti of the shooting sports foundation said sponsorship of the game was an experiment intended to deliver safety tips to players, while potentially generating interest in real-life sports.

The confluence of high-powered weaponry and youth shooting programs does not sit well even with some proponents of those programs. Stephan Carlson, a University of Minnesota environmental science professor whose research on the positive effects of learning hunting and outdoor skills in 4-H classes has been cited by the gun industry, said he “wouldn’t necessarily go along” with introducing children to more powerful firearms that added nothing useful to their experience.

“I see why the industry would be pushing it, but I don’t see the value in it,” Mr. Carlson said. “I guess it goes back to the skill base we’re trying to instill in the kids. What are we preparing them for?”

For Mr. Potterfield of MidwayUSA, who said his own children started shooting “boys’ rifles” at age 4, getting young people engaged with firearms — provided they have the maturity and the physical ability to handle them — strengthens an endangered American tradition.

Mr. Potterfield and his wife, Brenda, have donated more than $5 million for youth shooting programs in recent years, a campaign that he said was motivated by philanthropy, not “return on investment.”

“Our gifting is pure benevolence,” he said. “We grew up and live in rural America and have owned guns, hunted and fished all of our lives. This is our community, and we hope to preserve it for future generations.”