Featured Post

A Dog Named Buff (This is not a musing about a general topic like the others)

A Dog Named Buff (This is not a musing about a general topic like the others) The article about the dog who waited by the highway mont...

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

The Beckham Jr. Case

The Beckham Jr. Case

Let’s set the proper atmosphere for this case before rendering a verdict. Professional football has become a compulsive behavior activity for many players, fans, owners,  and media commentators. Pre and post game shows go on for hours before and after the game. There are television channels which cover nothing besides professional football 24 hrs a day. Betting on football games is a multibillion dollar industry. The player salaries are out of sight. The owner’s profits and franchise worth are 10 times more out of sight. The whole private ownership operation of the NFL teams is almost totally outside the legal system. The Commissioner is hired by the owners to represent the NFL when clearly the sole basis to keep his job is to keep the owners happy. Everything about NFL football these days is so jacked up on purpose to attract even more football fans. It is Donald Trump football version. 

In the midst of all this jacked up hype, football games manage to happen on Sunday, Monday, Thursday, and sometimes on Saturday for like a half a year. A full one third of game time on TV is advertisements. Most holidays, at most gatherings, the football games attract the biggest conversation and attention. There are so many unpredictable events during a football game that predicting the outcome with any degree of accuracy is virtually impossible unless one of the best team is playing one of the worst, in which case an upset against the odds only occurs sometimes instead of a lot of the time. 

Me, I enjoy watching a football game for the theatre of it all and watching all the unexpected things happen right before my eyes. I have learned not to root for teams but just individuals so I don’t get jacked around emotionally by all these unexpected happenings throughout the game. To be fair to persons like myself, who want to watch the game without all the bells and whistles, the advertisements, the endless banal and inane banter before and after the game about all the participants in the game—well, at least anything which happens during the game which detracts from the game should be outlawed. Football is so physically dangerous these days with the players bigger, faster, stronger, better trained, better coached, with internet generated game plans and game adjustments, etc. that individual talent becomes less and less the deciding factor, outside the quarterback.

So finally I get to the Beckham Jr. case. First of all, if we the fans get so compulsively stirred up about the game, imagine how jacked up the players get. Once the players come onto the field any behavior by any players or coaches whose purpose is to rattle the nerves or push opponents over the emotional edge should not be permitted. No taunting of any sort, not with baseball bats, not with verbal insults, not with inappropriate mocking of any sort. When the teams are on the field no chatter except pure football signals should be permitted. These players are trained to play football, there should be no additional talents like being able to ignore the most insulting of taunts or ridicule imaginable as a a requirement to play football. 

Once again football gets an exception to other businesses. If there are 25 workers in a confined area who have a job to do, no employer allows any individual to taunt someone to see if they can make that person lose control and and punch them in the nose. People are in the office to get a job done, not play mind games with others to drive them over the edge.

 The referees of that game should have put a stop to it immediately, not let it go on the entire game and let the fines and suspensions be figured out later on. In addition, there is no need for any talking between players to go on except verbal signals to teammates about play on the field. Social intercourse of any sort should be eliminated. Just play football. Period. You hear these commentators go on and on about how a football player needs learn how to accept any kind of taunts and ignore them. I don’t agree at all. For one thing, all the players should be concentrating on football and their own performance. If a player is not calling a signal of some sort to fellow players on their team, they should be required to keep their mouth shut or be penalized. My heavens, a lineman cannot make a move to alleviate an itch at the line and similarly, no player should feel free to verbally unnerve another player because they have an emotional desire to do so. 

If people want to be entertained by insults they can go watch Don Rickles (who we all like) or Donald Trump (who is serious about his insults). It seems outrageous that football players, besides being  good football players, have to put up with all sorts of taunting during the game. Are we there to watch a football game or to see who can taunt another to the extent they go bonkers? I am reminded of the old joke,” how do you tell if a spouse is lying?  If their mouth is moving.” In football how should we decide if a player is taunting an opponent? If their mouth is moving to communicate to a player from the other team. 

We are wiring all sorts of people up on the job today, including policemen. Maybe we need wire up all the players and we have a replay team to monitor all comments during the game. I guess I am kidding here, but I don’t know why we permit conversation between opposing players when they are on the field during a game. What is the point of allowing that? It has nothing to do with football per se.


So once again, we have another NFL ineptness where a star player gets suspended because the refs did’t do their job, and the league permits non football talk on the field during the game. I think it makes sense enough to simply tell players that when they step on the field, all their attention is on their own performance, and don’t communicate in any way with the opposing players. Just play football. What a novel idea. Maybe not as exciting, but would be pure football. Taunting does not toughen anybody up. It just empowers anti-social behavior. I, for one, just want to watch a football game. 

Monday, December 14, 2015

Cataloging Republicans——Category 1: ‘Family Values’ Republicans

Cataloging Republicans——Category 1: ‘Family Values’ Republicans

Republicans, like Democrats come in various ilk.  People are Republicans or Democrats for differing reasons. I reckon most people, once a Republican or Democrat, tend to stay that way all their lives—probably not to the same extent as to their religion, which often like their politics, they inherit. My guess is that it is easier to stay put with one’s inherited religion than inherited politics.  Neither religion or politics is science, so whatever I, or anyone else, says on theses topics is opinion. Of course not all opinions are equal. The best opinions are achieved via the best logic, the best knowledge of the matter, the best exposure to relevant facts, and so on. Opinions, by their very nature, are wrapped in feelings. One of the weaknesses of democracy is that feelings can often have a poor basis, and yet have strong power at the ballot box. 

Category 1 Republicans are a ‘Gut Feeling’ crowd. This crowd is best described by a recent conversation, if I can use the term loosely, with a gentleman who is a staunch Republican. He commented that he “hated’  Obama. So I asked “which policies of Obama do you oppose and why?”. Seemed a fair enough question. “ I just hate everything about him, especially how he purses his lips so much when he speaks.”  Ok, that’s a logical reason to “hate’ someone. I guess.  Well, at least to this person. I stayed silent to see if anything else followed. “This country is going down the tube because of all the entitlements.”  “You don’t think the less fortunate are entitled to some government help?” “No, let them earn their status in society like I did.”  “I don’t understand, do you really believe you earned what you have accomplished in life?”  “Yes I did, I worked hard to get where I am, I earned my success, I didn’t get any entitlements.

So I tried to pursue his point. “ Did you earn your genetic make-up?  Did you earn your parents? Did you earn the country into which you were born?  Did you earn your physical status or talents? Did you earn the neighborhood of your formative years?  Did you earn the quality of school you went to? Did you earn the good health care you got?  Did you earn being raised in a safe neighborhood? 
Did you earn a good family environment?  It just seems maybe you really didn’t earn a lot of the most important things that matter for you to have succeeded in life.”

I could see the frustration and anger emerging and knew this would be a short ‘discussion’.  “Well, there are lots of people born in poor situations in life who make something of themselves”. “But don’t you think a far greater percentage of them would end up making something of themselves if they had all the unearned advantages (entitlements) that you had?  I mean something here doesn’t seem too fair. Why should you get all these unearned gift-like entitlements and others can’t have these unearned entitlements? “Look, I don’t want to argue politics, it’s a waste of time. Let’s change the subject.  And then we let all these people into our country who are dragging us down.  America used to be a great country.”  “You make a series of broad statements and then say you don’t want to discuss them.”  “I am just giving you my feelings on a couple of things, now let’s talk about something else. I just can’t stand what is happening to our country.”

And, of course, there really is no point in further discussion because the person has little to offer but feelings. Climate change is a good example. To be fair, most of us probably couldn’t give a coherent fact based lecture on climate change that could last more than a minute or two. Climate change is a complicated matter. Science has essentially confirmed that our climate is changing, and in all probability due to human activities. To logically confront these scientists  one would have to find properly trained scientists in the field who do not work for the carbon emissions industries. In the absence of that, what basis other than vague feelings can one have to oppose efforts to prevent climate change?

Most major issues facing the entire planet today are complicated. This makes it difficult for democracies, or any other form of government, to properly address these issues. We end up too often with the blind leading the blind via varied feelings as opposed to any real comprehension of the issues at stake. What does this bode for the future? “The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind.”

Pondering just about everything is in my nature. The gentleman in question lives in my building, which is the only reason I know him. He bothers no one. He is pleasant to everyone. So why is he so unsympathetic to the less fortunate in his own country, or to let some victims of ISIS, now living in refugee camps get asylum, at least temporary here in the U.S?  Especially since these Category 1 Republicans are invariably the most professed ‘patriots’, willing in almost every incidence, to support whatever invasion of the moment, or at least let the same ‘unfortunates’ be the casualties and targets for snipers and land mines, etc. Perhaps I miss the point, instead of entitlements we could do just that—put the less fortunate in the military and send them off, rewarded I guess with mandatory memorial ceremonies at half time during sport games. It just seems if we are going to invade other countries as sort of a national pastime, then everyone should need sacrifice not just paid mercenaries.

His lack of sympathy for the less fortunate seems to come from ‘family values’. This guy has nephews and nieces, and great nieces or whatever by the dozens. It is a very close knit group and they gather for all sorts of birthdays, weddings, etc. constantly. The gift exchanges alone must be by the hundreds, a sort of the ‘haves’ giving to the ‘haves’. To my knowledge he has few, if any, friends outside this genetic cabal. Of course there is nothing wrong with being friendly, where possible, with genetic relatives—but an ethical problem arises when that is where empathy ends. Apparently ‘only families count’ is ok. Somehow, if this is the case, why would the gentleman in question ever develop any empathy with diversity of any sort? His is a world of ‘every family for themselves’.

Practically all the active hostilities around the globe today, whether it be terrorism or ground wars, involve religious or ethnic cabals. Perhaps it would be a tad more peaceful around the globe if we got rid of such cabals and all just followed the global principle called the Golden Rule—an inherent genetic component of the human genome. Perhaps we don’t need ‘family values’ but instead an ‘all lives matter’ mentality. For those who think otherwise and commit crimes against other humans, we just put them in jail. 

The more we connect with reality, the more we understand that the evolutionary process is far from finished, and so many kinks yet to be ironed out.  Are we the last species whose evolutionary progress will just culminate as the creme de la creme of species and evolution be over? I sure hope we don’t end up with any more species with varied inherited religions. 

P.S. Having the Golden Rule be the ethical principle for any society is not so much a moral issue as a ‘family value’ protection. Parents genuinely and rightfully so, want the best of possible futures for their offspring. Granted this is a valid desire, everyone needs to understand an important historical fact. 

Only very few empires of any sort collapse because they lacked military might. Empires almost always fall for two reasons: the cost of maintaining an empire abroad becomes too expensive, and the distribution of wealth at home becomes too concentrated among too few. Any society which is serious about protecting the future of their own offspring, better understand that until the playing fields are reasonably fair for all citizens——and especially children, that society will implode upon itself. When in history has there been an exception? The extent of ‘ghettoes’ determines the future, not the degree of wealth of the wealthy. 

Monday, December 7, 2015

NFL as Theatre

Why the NFL is Theatre More So Than Physical Excellence

Only fools would seriously bet on football unless it is an odds based contest, where it becomes a numbers game, not one of picking the team who will win.  When the experts, and there are plenty of them who are actually very knowledgeable about football, start picking who will win games, the winner out of all of them will be in the 60 percentile range. Imagine where that puts the rest of us.

Let’s just use the wk 13 games as illustration.

Packer’s were favored to win by 3.  Well, they won thanks to a nearly impossible Hail Mary Pass maybe on the basis of a blown face mask call. Probably the odds makers didn’t consider this in their contemplation of a winner. 

Chicago was favored to win by 8.5. Well, Chicago lost at home no less. What were the experts missing when they predicted it would be a blow out?  Probably were missing nothing except how unpredictable football is. When I see snippets of a pre game (it should really be pre-week) analysts vigorously and emotionally presenting their case of who is going to win, they ought to preface it with their same vigorous past predictions which were wrong almost as often as not. After about a month of this I would be afraid to have an opinion which is wrong so much of the time. 

Carolina was predicted to beat N.O. and they did but it took like 41 points to do so. 

New England was favored by 10.5 puts, another blow out with a team (Philly) who loses a lot. Well not this day, Philly beat New England with an offensive explosion. 

If NFL football is so unpredictable, how come so many people are addicted to it? Let’s face it, it is good theatre precisely because there are literally hundreds of different ways to win or lose a football game. Nobody wastes any time or money spending all week yakking about how a new movie might come out. If it is a good movie then it will be filled with all sorts of subplots and exciting events en- route to a conclusion. Football is like that too except for some reason so many people think they can really predict what will happen en-route to some players hopping up and down at the end and others crestfallen and dazed. 

How anyone could coach football and retain their sanity is beyond me. I wonder what the average lifespan is of football coaches who have coached more than a couple of years? It would take a pretty rugged central nervous system to handle such endless surprises. We have all known individuals who  scream bloody murder throughout an entire football game. Once upon a time I was near or at that level, but finally I have come to the point where I can watch a football game purely as theatre, much like I might watch a movie. Much the same can be said for all of life: it is theatre, we need accept it as such, and don’t bet on anything. At least a football game is over after 3-4 hours, two hours with TIVO. 
I read a book during football games with the sound so low I am only aroused when the announcers start screaming. Besides, with instant replay, it is hard to miss anything. If the book is something that requires intense concentration, then the football game prevents me from falling asleep, stirs me  up mentally enough to help me understand better anything complicated in writing. Carolina has the best record so I guess they must be the favorite to win the Superbowl. Well, there are 12 teams that make the playoffs and most any of them are good enough to win 4 games in a row and that would make them Super Bowl champions. There probably is a mathematical equation to properly judge who will win. You start with physical talent at the varied positions and then add hundreds of uncontrollable factors and poof, we have the winner. The trouble is, we have no idea which of the uncontrollable factors will come into play, so I guess there really is no mathematical equation after all. 

That’s kind of strange, for all the incessant babble leading up to the football game it would certainly seem an awful lot of people have the clearest vision of who will win and why. While no one has any clear idea of who will win, after the game, these experts will tell us exactly why one team was better than the other. Huh? If uncontrollable factors control the outcome, how does that make one team better than the other?  Well, one could argue, over time the team with the best physical talent would win the most games. True, so we will make each one game contest in the playoffs a best of seven series. Except, if they play that many games, since injuries are one of the biggest uncontrollable factors, this can drastically reduce any teams physical talent. That is to say physical talent is not a constant in football at all. Football is a very complicated game. So maybe, to eliminate physical injuries, each team could be represented game time by a computer game plan. Then we can all watch animated figures on TV carry out the respective game plans to see who wins. 

I don’t think T.O. would like that idea. “What?  Football without me?  You shut up and don’t speak to me again unless I speak to you first. Time for me to love me some me.”


Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Whose Lives Matter?

Whose Lives Matter?

I reckon it starts with ourselves. We are rather sure our life matters.  At least it does as long as we are alive and things aren’t so bad that we seek suicide. My life sure matters to me, and I have spent a lifetime seeking contentment, avoiding danger, and seeking to stay healthy. In terms of the evolutionary process, individuals don’t really matter that much. If we have a trait which inches the process forward that’s ok. But if we don’t, some other human will have that trait down the line and it will inch forward then. One thing the evolutionary process has—is Time, billions of years so far, and no end in sight. As is always the case, WE go TIME stays. If particular individuals are not essential to the process, then does the life of any individual of any species matter? There is no evidence that the Creator of this evolutionary process, God if you wish, ever intervenes with the laws which govern the evolutionary process. That doesn’t stop most of us—we pray anyway, with this self serving belief that yes, God will help us get a better test score, win a football game, win a war, save us from cancer, etc. There is, however, no statistical evidence that God saves any particular religious sect from any of the dangers we pray to escape. It seems that God doesn’t give a damn about any of us individually. Why God even allowed ole Abraham Lincoln to be assassinated. Some gratitude.

So doesn’t God help us personally at all?  Well, yes he has helped us. The evolutionary process has led to a human species with an inherent sense of ethics. It is this inherent sense of ethics which enables all of us to be helped via the Golden Rule. Now wait a minute, does this mean that the rest of us are the only hope for those who die from curable diseases, that have poor schools to attend, that have poor health care available?  Actually, that’s about the short of it. Until we collectively take care of each other, a lot of lives end up not mattering. It always boils down to ethics vs greed. Like who wants to have higher health insurance premiums so that everyone gets good health care? I have other things—for me of course—that I want to spend money on. Like who wants to pay more for commodities so that all workers earn a living wage?  If I have to pay a just and fair price for things I purchase, how am I going to purchase everything that catches my fancy?  

Whatever society we live in, it is we, collectively, who determine which lives matter. If we are born into a good environmental situation, then our prognosis skyrockets. If we are born with a better set of genes than most, then our prognosis skyrockets again.  We will then prosper, declare our prosperity a self earned one, and get increasingly annoyed with those whose disadvantages makes life difficult for them. They really begin to get on our nerves. If they complain quietly, gated away out of sight, that’s one thing—that’s their right, but getting up in our face about it in public places, well—that’s another matter altogether. Who let them out of their cages?

When blacks march in the nicer parts of cities or towns, our first impulse is to demand they go back to their ghettos and tell their fellow blacks to quit killing each other if black lives matter. After all, far more blacks kill blacks than any other ethnic group kills blacks. We have the stats to back up our feelings. Then again, more white people kill white people by far than blacks kill white people, more Muslims kill Muslims than any other religious group kills Muslims, more Christians kill Christians than any other religious groups kill Christians, more poor or less fortunate people kill people than affluent kill people (excluding govt armies).Those black kids who grew up in a ghetto environment didn’t choose their environment or genes, or their poor schools, or poor health care, or no safe neighborhoods to play in, etc. I suspect it is hard for any us to imagine what our attitudes might be like had we ourselves grown up in such an environment. Look, it is not civilized, enlightening, safe, motivational, or emotionally secure to live in such environments. For decades we have looked the other way as such communities deteriorated to the concrete jungles they are today. Well, we really didn’t look the other way as much as we just kept these kind of communities gated off, out of sight, and out of mind. We don’t lose sleep about young kids in downtown Detroit or Newark or Los Angeles who don’t exactly have an emotionally uplifting community atmosphere. Then we wonder why, after decades of neglect, so many have a huge chip on their shoulders, simply put “You don’t like me and I don’t like you because you don’t like me”  Of course we would retort that “I have never done anything personally to you, so put the knife down.” That is true, of course, how could we have personally mistreated any of them—these ‘people’ are normally nowhere in sight, let alone have any interaction with us. 

On the other hand, if some politician proposes we not use property taxes to pay for education and spend the same amount of money for education on every child, we would never vote for that politician. Few people really believe that all of us, collectively, have any responsibility to level the playing fields for the less fortunate, or make sure everyone in our society has a chance to work at a level of their talent and make a living wage doing so. Of course we don’t. We basically believe in the survival of the fittest—in capitalism with no limits. This fittest contest has worked so well that today 2-5% of the people own 90% of the wealth in America. Boy are they fit. And rich. The vast majority of people see nothing wrong with this and just daydream, wishing it could be us instead of these others with all this wealth.

The solution is clear enough. Blacks should go back in their own neighborhoods to bring the message that black lives matter to each other. Whites, or more precisely and correctly, ALL affluent people, of any ethnicity, ought to start supporting politicians of the Bernie Sanders type. The world doesn’t come to an end with democratic socialism. People in places like Denmark, Sweden, and so on, live longer, are happier, and less quarrelsome. Of course they are, their citizens don’t have to worry about having a good school, decent paying jobs, enough vacation time, good health care, good retirement benefits, going to college IF they can pass the entrance exams, etc. Most of the things the average Americans, and all the poor worry about, are not matters of concern in a democratic socialist society. Ok, they don’t produce a small cabal of extremely wealthy individuals like we do. But with like everything else, wealth included, enough is enough. It isn’t just those kids from poor schools who are stupid, but most Americans are too—they consistently vote against their own best economic interests. And almost always out of prejudice against this group or that group. The wealthy are smart, they cater to people’s prejudices to get their votes and then with victory, ensure even more laws are passed which will make it even easier for them to get even richer. Let the ‘common folk’ go after each other for their economic or societal status and spend their anger on ethnic groups, religious groups, cultural groups, immigrants, sexual orientations, etc.  It’s a trade-off—the wealthy support/encourage the prejudices of the ‘common/poor’ folks and the ‘common/poor’ folks vote for their prejudices. Kind of an interesting symbiotic relationship.

The game, however, is about up, and the consequences are likely to be total chaos, the likes of which Americans have never seen before. Electronic gadgets enable all sorts of groups to be well organized today and when the dam breaks, the police can’t be everywhere and the wealthy, with so much to protect and so little means to do so, will pay the usual historical price when it ends up being the have not’s vs the halves. 

This kind of conflict is not necessary. When the Golden Rule is the common basis for ethics, all levels of society prosper, conflict is avoided, greed is curtailed, people support responsible reproduction and people become pro-life for all citizens after birth, not have their ethics end at birth.

The trouble with using the Golden Rule as the basis of ethics in a society, rather than religious sects of various ilk, is that the Golden Rule is so basic and so simple, that it is hard to escape the realization of being unethical. If we don’t want our own kids to go to a poor school, then no one’s child should be attending a poor school; if we want good health care for ourselves, then everybody else should have good health care also; and so it goes, case after case with obvious enough answers. With inherited religions and ancient scriptures written thousands of years ago, we can dodge ethical bullets, when needed, and concentrate on self serving objectives. With religious sects we have prayers, we have rituals, we have forgiveness by a merciful God, we have confessionals which let us start over, we have scriptures—with so many outdated and confusing or contradictory statements— that we can pick and choose which ones to pay any attention to; we have inspiring and glittering cathedrals and pompous ceremonies with endless inspirational oratories and costumes; we have an actual God who is personally committed to giving us safe passage through life, and if he doesn’t——well, God acts in mysterious ways and has different plans to make us a success in life; and finally, we have ‘family values’. These ‘family values’, a cornerstone of all religious sects, enables us to justify breaking the Golden Rule since the more we take care of ourselves and our immediate family, the closer we come getting into Heaven. ‘Family values’ answers the question as to whose ‘lives matter’. 

Whenever any society allows ghettoes to proliferate in that society, or creates a society where 43% do not even make enough money to qualify to pay federal income taxes, that society is self destructing, and self destructing inanely in an attempt to endorse the right of 2-5% of people to own 90% of the wealth. There is little sense getting mad at the behavior of these ghetto residents. How many of us might behave after growing up in such an environment is beyond our best guesses. We can pass ‘stand our ground’ laws, we can all arm ourselves to the teeth, we can increase the number of police, we can pass mandatory sentencing laws, we can tolerate 60% unemployment rates in our ghettoes; we could, I guess, increase the number of people we put in jail so that our prisons contain even more than 25% of the people in prison across the whole globe, we can continue to spend vast amounts of money (borrowed money no less) to invade weak and poor countries, one after the other in the name of freedom and national security——all of these things can be done, but violence will beget violence—always has and always will continue to do so. If we ever, by mistake or necessity, ride quickly through any of our huge ghettoes, we are puzzled why the streets are so empty, no people sitting on their porch steps, no kids all over the sidewalks and streets riding bicycles and playing games, like in days long since gone. Where are the people and the kids?  Today, in poor ghettoes, they are all locked up inside in order to be safe. When these kids become teenagers and emerge into our society, we will not like the kind of mental state many of them have acquired. They all have electronic gadgets which portray how the affluent live. Many of them are mentally and emotionally unstable as a result of the environment in which they spent their formative years, as well as very angry. When they explode and assault us or others like us, it doesn’t do much good to plead “why are you doing this to me, I have never done anything to any of you personally, put the knife down, take the money and let’s call it even.” 

If the Golden Rule suddenly became the standard for ethics in our society, there would still, for years, be millions of people who were raised in our ghettoes and have huge chips on their shoulders. Right now we are faced with too many people on this planet, too much family values and patriotic fervor, we are trapped in a global society without minimum wages which are living wages, no enforceable responsible reproduction, and sectarian warfare as our ethics—-rather than the Golden Rule. We have a ‘Holy Mackerel Andy, we’s done got ourselves in a terrible mess’ situation. 

I reckon we all matter when we collectively decide all lives matter, and as a consequence, level the playing fields so that even the least fortunate amongst us can achieve reasonable contentment in their lives.  That’s called win-win. The way the global game is being played now—nobody wins, and everybody loses—as like lemmings, we rush closer and closer to an evolutionary cliff/correction. 

Not to worry, evolutionary Time, measured in millions of years, will work things out like it has for billions of years. Ethics will evolve, like it already has been evolving, and all of us, caught up in the vortex of modern ethical shortcomings, will not suffer the future anymore than we suffered not existing  for the billions of years which preceded each of us. How can our death be something to fear since when we are dead there is nothing to fear, just like before the spinning wheel of fortune gave us birth, we suffered no feelings or thoughts about the billions of years prior to our birth. After death, Buddy Holly had it right when he sang “it really doesn’t matter anymore.” Death is the great equalizer in that nobody’s past life or the future matters anymore to them when dead.

P.S.Even assuming it is correct that the basis for human ethics is a genetic component expressed via the Golden Rule, this does not make the whole issue cut and dried. Human laughter has a genetic component, human reasoning has a genetic component, human personality has a genetic component , and so on. We are not all equal in this genetic component anymore than we are all equal with other genetic components. Part of the trouble here is that we always like to view ethics as a contest between right and wrong, whereas the evolutionary process views progress via most useful and less useful. There is no contest between a Devil and a God. 

The next caveat here is that no one always treats others as they do themselves. Things get relative here. And we need remember that the reward for ethics is personal contentment—not Heaven, wealth, power, control, etc. And what are we to do when someone does not follow the Golden Rule? The answer here might seem to be that we need concentrate collectively on getting as many people as possible to follow the Golden Rule and just punish those who engage in criminal behavior. Hitler certainly didn’t follow the Golden Rule but then no one ever could possibly view Hitler as a contented man. Donald Trump could care less about the golden rule—his compulsive behavior is all about money, power, fame. Now who could possibly view him as a contented person?


When the Golden Rule fails for lack of collective action, we get the products of our collective failure to level the playing fields for others. Let’s take a product of one of our ghettoes—a hardened criminal thug who does bad things to a lot of innocent people whenever given the chance. Does his life matter? While perhaps in some abstract way it matters, punishment for criminal behavior trumps hypothetical considerations. What about someone raised in a good environment with ample genetic advantages who does not follow the Golden Rule? They had level playing fields and turned out bad. Again, criminal behavior must be punished. What about the 2 million Vietnamese who were killed by Americans in a senseless invasion, who pays for this massive carnage? I supported that war. Should I have been jailed? Most would probably agree this was a collective failure to practice the Golden Rule and the result was tragic for many people, including 35,000 American soldiers. All that can be gleaned here is that the goal is always to maximize the Golden Rule by collective individual support. Future tragedies can be avoided, but the damage already incurred, most often cannot be undone. The 35,000 American soldiers and 2 million Vietnamese are dead. Because the Golden Rule here was a collective failure, innocent people died. Despite ethical failures the evolutionary process moves on, just as it moved on when there was no human species with a genetic ethical component. Just because my life matters to me (as long as I am alive) doesn’t mean I am protected from all the factors in life that potentially can end my life. Hell, I could inadvertently be run over in a car driven by Mother Teresa. While ethical behavior can bring personal contentment, our lives can be ended, by chance, thousands of different ways, and—in any case—our lives will all be ended one way or another. TIME stays, WE go. So which lives matter? As many as we collectively manage to make matter. 

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

T.O. and 'Sweetness'--2 boys from the Rural South (Ala/Miss).

2 Boys From the Rural South (Ala/Miss)T.O. and ‘Sweetness’

These two NFL stars would seem to have little in common, except they actually have a lot in common. Terrell Owens was born in Alexander City, a dirt poor community with about 14,000 people and Walter Payton was born in Columbia, Mississippi, a dirt poor community with about  6,000 people. Their communities were similar—mostly poor and black. Neither families had any money and were dirt poor. From this region and environment their lives proceeded in an interesting fashion.

My sources for Terrell Owen are multiple and extensive since I have been intrigued by his personality for some time. The source for the snippets about Walter Paton are exclusively from the book ‘Sweetness’ by Jeff Pearlman.  Except for Walter’s wife, the book has not come under fire from most others who knew Walter Payton. For both athletes, those who knew them well have  been generous enough with praise and affection, excluding a spouse and significant or insignificant others. Both athletes believed intensely in God; both rarely went to church; both strongly believed that God was their biggest fan; and when things went sour—well, “God behaves in mysterious ways” or “God has other plans for me in life”, etc. Both athletes were extremely self focused about their athletic performances and league records they sought to break. Terrell Owens was irritatingly open about it; Walter Payton camouflaged it, with public statements to the contrary, stating that the only thing which mattered was whether the team won, not who had the best stats in the game. Payton’s teammates and coaches knew otherwise, but didn’t care since no one took a more fierce physical punishment every game than Walter Payton. Walter wasn’t very big, and was all bruised up most of the season. In his teammates’ mind he earned the right to be selfish. When Sweetness was denied the ball enough he pouted, when T.O. was denied the ball enough he exploded, and often intimidated a quarterback to change the play in the huddle. That raised a storm in San Francisco, and the storm was fierce enough that with ensuing teams, it happened less often because coaches, to keep the boat afloat, made sure T.O. was an often enough a target and T.O. made sure to keep the pressure on.  Always a tense situation.

Sweetness grew up in an intact close knit family with a brother and a sister.
T.O. grew up in his grandmother’s house with his mother, a brother, and a sister. Although his father lived across the street T.O. never knew that until much older. 

Sweetness developed an almost perfect physique, almost overnight, without any weight training until late in high school.
T.O. had little natural athletic talent and was not even a starter in high school and most of college. 

Sweetness had the run of the neighborhood and was well liked by his peers. He was, even back then, very much a ‘somebody’ in the community, among schoolmates and school coaches.  
T.O. was only allowed out of the house by his grandmother to go to school or to play sports, but when practice was over T.O. had to come home. Hardly anyone back then can remember much about him. He was very much a nobody. Even his bicycle could not be ridden outside his small yard.

Walter Payton was very much a mama’s boy. 
Terrell Owens was very much a grandma’s boy

Walter Payton was ’special’ by the time he reached high school and ‘pampered’ like any other talented football player would be. Terrell Owens was kept isolated from other kids because his grandmother said he was ‘better’ than the other kids, that he was special, that God would only let him succeed in life if he never trusted anyone—that others would always try to keep him ‘down on the farm’, that he should always tell the truth and live with the consequences. Terrell Owens was a young ‘tattle-tale’ in school. When kids would gang up on him for squealing, at first he ran home, but his grandmother would not let him in, and sent him back to defend himself. The downside perhaps here is that T.O.learned not to fear conflict, that to stand your ground was what God and his grandmother wanted him to do. It was always Terrell Owens against everyone else. He vowed someday to be a somebody instead of a nobody. This vow became the total focus in his life, and centered about becoming the best possible wide receiver he could be. 

Both were typical southern blacks of their day—-respectful, shy, and goal oriented. “Yes sir” was used by both and in T.O.’s case right up until his early days with San Francisco when Steve Young asked him to ‘cut it out’.  

Walter Payton was taken in the first round of the NFlL draft by the Chicago Bears. He immediately became a star on the team, actually their biggest star. T.O. was taken 87th on the third round of the NFL draft by San Francisco. Jerry Rice was the star there and T.O. thus a virtual nobody.

Both, early in their careers were quiet, shy, and insecure. Sweetness remained that way his entire career. T.O. after a few years with San Francisco, created a football persona which became the T.O. personality. His former coaches seemed to all agree: There is Terrell Owens and there is T.O. Bill Walsh, once his San Francisco coach, said both personalities were the real thing. 

Sweetness didn’t have to demand anything. He was the best running back and would get the ball as much as possible. T.O. was mired in competition and essentially developed his T.O. persona to maximize the pressure for the coach and quarterback to get the ball to him. He learned from Jerry Rice that there needed to be unpleasant consequences when the ball did not come his way often enough. 

Both Sweetness and T.O. were friendly to everyone on the surface, but neither one tended to have close friends or share personal problems with others. Both lasted a lot of years in the NFL, and this longevity is especially noteworthy for Sweetness whose body took a real pounding out on the football field, year after year. Sweetness did develop a relatively close friendship with Roland Harper, Matt Suey, his agent, and his two personal assistants. T.O. seems to have never had any close relationship with anyone outside his grandmother who, by the time T.O. got picked by San Francisco, was in the beginning stage of  Alzheimer’s disease and after a few years died.   

T.O. never married. Sweetness did, early in his career, but it was soon a marriage in name only. Sweetness found early on that tons of pretty girls would slip him their number and he could have sex whenever he wanted. He became addicted to sex as an end in itself. He and his wife essentially lived in different houses. Sweetness had his wife, his significant other who was an airline flight attendant, and a huge cache of telephone numbers of girls from different cities. Mike Singletary, a very religious person, like most of Walter’s teammates, knew Walter was involved constantly with different women, and one time deliberately sat next to Walter on a plane and confronted him about all this. Walter never said a thing, just looked out the plane window, but Singletary could see the tears stream down his face. Sweetness went through life with internal torments. 

Like Sweetness, T.O. had ready access to a lot of girls for sex. Both had endless telephone numbers for girls in city after city. With Sweetness, since this availability came early on in his career, it became a compulsive behavior. He didn’t hang with the guys after practice and he used sex as a therapy for his ego and to compensate for the physical pain he was often in.  T.O.’s access to endless women started mostly after college and it never became compulsive. He compartmentalized his sexual life to Sunday and Mondays. After that he didn’t want any distractions of any sort for days of practice and game days. Sex on Monday and Tuesday was maybe like a substitute for masturbation.  Sweetness was out in public a lot with girls; his wife knew but just viewed that as the price a wife pays to be married to a sports hero. T. O., on the other hand, was rarely seen in public with anyone, period. Sweetness hired mostly very competent women to handle his appointments, his publicity, his charities, and to keep his wife in the dark about most matters. These assistants were as close to him personally as probably anyone else in his life, and not in any sexual way. His agent, a southern white man who was his agent from the git-go was the one who protected Sweetness the most, and kept him from doing anything foolish—especially as it might affect his public image. T.O. had a publicist but not so much to advise him in any way, but just to keep all matters outside of his own training regimen away from him. He always had his own personal trainer. T.O. paid dearly for his inability to focus on anything other than football. All other aspects of his life, financial, and otherwise were loose cannons.  

Sweetness was built with a strong durable body, but a body constantly in pain from all the hits on the field he was taking. He became addicted to pain killers and ate them like candy year after year. Back then there was little, if any, concern about the consequences for the punishment bodies were taking out on the football field. Tough men just toughed it out. Sweetness was maybe the toughest of all.

Sweetness was a ‘loner’ on the team, never drank, smoked, swore that much, or hung out with guys after practice.T.O. was also a ‘loner’ on the team, more so than Payton, and seldom spoke to other teammates until late in his career when he felt media pressure to at least act like his teammates existed. Unlike Sweetness, T.O. was a health nut and was absolutely obsessed with his diet and training methods. The exception was one time when some injury was painful. When the doctor prescribed some pain medication, perhaps not surprisingly, T.O. ate it like candy and ended up in the hospital when his assistant thought he was trying to commit suicide. All his enemies in the press thrived on that theory. Payton, on the other hand, ate junk food all the time. He was not health conscious by any means. Maybe it is not so surprising that he died at age 46 from a rare form of liver/bile duct cancer. Was this related to playing football? Who knows? Clearly his liver took a physical and chemical pounding year after year. Any conclusion would be speculative. 

Both T.O. and Sweetness created public images of themselves which served their personal situation and personality. With Sweetness he saw value in being projected as a loving husband, father, all for the team and not himself, and friend to the less fortunate. Sweetness really did empathize with the less fortunate, especially those with severe conditions , but he also realized the media value in his acts of sympathy. He milked it endlessly. To his teammates Sweetness was an enigma, a sophomoric practical joker, but they liked him, saw the punishment he took on the field, and felt protective of him. Some felt his childish practical jokes, like constantly pulling someone’s pants down and endless other things high school boys do, were out of place in an adult locker room. But they pretty much all were very protective of Sweetness and Sweetness was always, on the surface, the picture of Sweetness to everyone. Whatever he was, he was not a mean person. T.O. either. 

T.O.’s relationship with teammates was more enigmatic to an extreme. Nobody felt any need to protect him. No one in their right mind would pull his pants down as a joke. Or any other kind of joke on him either. Teammates and coaches treaded gingerly around him. He never bothered anyone except the coaches and his quarterback. No one knew over what, and when, T.O. might blow up. T.O.’s ego was right on his sleeve and his attention always directed to his own practice and play. Others, for the most part, didn’t exist.  His coaches tended to marvel at his work ethic and focus, but were driven nuts by his temperament.  He was not the kind of player any coach felt they had under control. When Wade Phillips, became his coach and the press asked how he planned to control T.O., he wisely replied: “ I am not here to control T.O. or any other player. I am here to help them become the very best player they can become.” 

Both T.O. and Sweetness were very sensitive about how others treated them. Both were highly self centered when it came to their personal stats and any records they might be able to break. The difference was that while Sweetness pouted and got real quiet when he didn’t get the ball enough, especially when some sort of record was on the line, while T.O. simply exploded, saw it all as the conspiracy of others to not give him his due. Bill Walsh once explained that there was no way to know when T.O. might turn the whole boat over, that his perception of how others felt about him was not always the same as reality. Jerry Rice commented that “it was a mistake to ‘cross T.O., that T.O. would never forget or forgive any perceived slight.”

In Sweetness’s mind the world came to him and he, in turn, did his best to perform well. In T.O.’s mind the world would do everything it could to block his personal progress to be somebody and he, in turn, would run over, through, or around every hurdle others put in his way. 

Sweetness felt uncomfortable meeting with the press and was not a good source of information for the press as he was very close-mouthed.  But he was always polite and said the correct political things about any game or other players. He was big on saying the only thing important was the team winning, not his own performance, but he was just as concerned about his own stats as T.O. With T.O., the press was of course, just another form of the enemy.  He didn’t befriend them anymore than he befriended anyone else. On the other hand the press was the means whereby T.O. could promote himself. And T.O. loved to do just that.  And the more T.O. used the press to promote himself, the more they became antagonistic toward T.O. Sweetness let others do the promoting of his own image. T.O. promoted himself, a one man band, and in reality he really was a one man band. Outside his grandmother, who else would T.O. feel made him a success besides himself?  In one sense no one ever gave anything to T.O. simply because he would take it himself before anyone could give it to him. If T.O. scored important touchdowns in a game no one made it faster to a microphone to herald his accomplishments than T.O. himself. His personal celebrations on the field are legendary. This irritated the press and many fans. His teammates were the least upset. They were used to it. A typical teammate would say, in various ways, “T.O. hardly ever speaks to me. But he never causes me any problem either. He works as hard or harder as anyone on the team to be ready on game day. We like having him on the team. He helps us win games. He is a good teammate.”  His coaches, often frustrated by his volatile and unpredictable moods, almost never disliked him. He was their time bomb with talent and a short fuse. It is simply hard for a coach to hate an athlete who is so focused and tries so hard to be the very best he can be. As Steve Young, his quarterback at San Francisco said, “You can say whatever you want about T.O. off the field, but there is no criticism you can make about him once the game starts. He excels at all aspects of his position.” Vince Lombardi would have loved T.O. 

Sweetness had an army of players, coaches, sport writers, and fans who would sing his praises for him. With T.O. he did the praising of himself— his coaches and players ended up doing the defending, and the press had a field day attacking him. Strangely, and it really is unique, T.O. hardly ever responded to his critics in any harsh terms, and never by name.  T.O. was all about himself. It was not his nature to spend any time attacking any particular person. He is almost always, away from the field and press, very soft spoken, very articulate, very personable. People who only know T.O. from his press clips or what the press says about him, are invariably taken back by how different he seems in person. When a microphone is not in front of him, the T.O. persona disappears and the original Terrell Owens is what you get—the shy, friendly, humble, and thoughtful but detached person he is. 

Both Sweetness and T.O. were/are really lonely people. They had so much of everything and yet they both felt very alone.  Maybe a high percentage of ‘important people’ do. After every peak of success, for both Sweetness and T.O. came the feeling “This is all there is at the top? Where is the ultimate contentment of success?” When both aged and were forced into retirement by age related decline in performance—surprisingly, lovable Sweetness found himself more alone, bored, and depressed than T.O. He actually got less attention in retirement than T.O. currently gets. ‘Characters’ probably will always retain more public interest past their time. In one sense, T.O. has whole new aspects of life to which he can give some attention. The T.O. persona has no use for him these days, so it has slowly disappeared. In his 40’s T.O. is just starting to explore a social life, to interact more with others, to give thought to his finances, to be some kind of father to all his carelessly conceived offspring. Sweetness used protection with his sexual dalliances and T.O. did not. Sweetness only had one child out of wedlock and when that happened he signed an agreement to provide support for the child up until age 18, under the condition that he never has to see the child or have him publicly named as the father. And he never, to the day he died, would ever agree to see the boy. No Sweetness there. 

Both Sweetness and T.O. actually get along well with children, at least for the little time they are around them. The two kids of Payton actually love him despite the extent to which he neglected them when growing up. When present he was always attentive to them. Only when T.O. retired did he make any real attempt to spend any time with his several out of wedlock kids. T.O. has no use for the mothers as he suspects it was all a career plan of theirs to have sex, have a child, then collect $40,000 a month for child support. Just by coincidence, none of these women ever married anyone, perhaps lest the child support payments stop. Who knows? That stuff is a real messy arena. 

Sweetness was never, like most professional athletes, very sharp when it came to business ventures. At death he was well off, but not real wealthy. T.O. is harder to pinpoint since he has been in court endlessly to get child support payments reduced. You do that by pleading poverty and try to hide your money every which place. T.O. probably has been as unsuccessful at business as Sweetness, and maybe more so, or maybe less so. No way to really know. One thing is for sure. His income, each year, is far more than the vast majority of people who are retired. 

Both Sweetness and T.O. are remembered well and affectionately by their former coaches and players. The only head coach who refrains from kind words about T.O. is Jason Garrett of the Cowboys and he says nothing, less he gain the ire of Jerry Jones, the owner. The Cowboy situation between owner, coach, and players has always been a three ring circus since Jerry Jones became the owner.  Steve Mariucci, coach of T.O. at San Francisco, has the most reason to hate T.O., but he does not and simply says, “I love the guy, but he drove me nuts”. It must be remembered that the persona of T.O. was created under his watch and Mariucci was blindsided by it. Other subsequent coaches knew what they were getting, and found their own ways to keep T.O. under control, at least most of the time. What coach, out of the blue, wants to find out a given player is changing the play call in the huddle? And even worse, the different play called was successful more often than not. What a ego challenge that is. Other coaches found their own ways for T.O. to give input in ways which protected their ego. But that is vintage T.O.. to demand a certain play be called when he sees an opening for himself to make a big play. Since he was mostly right in the result, T.O. rationalized that since the object is to win the game he did what he had to do. In his case, without doubt, the motivation was to increase his own stats.

He forced his release from Philly when he realized Philly never intended to give him the big salaries promised in a long term contract. In football, the owners can walk away from a contract any year they choose to. The players cannot. The Philly Owner was one of the first owners to get a player to sign a long term contract with huge salaries at the back end, which he never intended to pay. When T.O. saw what was happening to others when they hit the back end, he was furious at having been duped into his contract. He watched Philly rewrite the contract for Donovan McMann and decided his contract should be rewritten too. Told that this was the kind of thing done for productive quarterbacks, not wide receivers he went ballistic. T.O. was not being paid as much as any of the top ten receivers. He could hear his grandmother’s voice telling him “They will do anything to keep you down, not give you your due, don’t you let them get away with it.” The fans had loved him since with him they almost won the Super Bowl, but fans are always fair-weather beasts, and they could care less about where T.O. stood on any salary scale. All players the fans felt, made way too much money and they should be grateful. T.O. didn’t hold out, he just refused to speak to anyone except his wide receiver coach. He never gave in, which surprised no one, and Philly had to release him. Dallas picked him up and made him one of the highest paid wide receivers. T.O.never forgave Donovan for not supporting him in his contract dispute.  

All T.O.’s quarterbacks except Romo and to some extent Donovan, defend T.O. and for good reason. Most, including Romo and Donovan, only made it to the pro bowl, with few exceptions, when T.O. was on the team. For all the pressure he put on them, he made them look good. With Romo, it is personal. Romo felt pressure to be the leader of the team, but many on the team considered T.O. the leader—faults and all. T.O.’s attempt, at this point in his career, to be more involved with his teammates backfired, bit him in the ass. The Cowboys let T.O. go so that Romo could be the undisputed leader, and probably also realized T.O. was past his peak age wise. Of course, you really can’t make anybody be a leader, and if a quarterback is a good quarterback, there is no need to make him a leader. He is certainly the most important player out on the field, leader or no leader. The current locker room leaders of the Cowboys all have huge emotional and criminal problems. One such leader, at least for a time, required round the clock security guards to protect the public from such a leader. I guess it is all good theatre. 

Finally, both Sweetness and T.O. are lucky they are not coming into the league today. Sweetness would never last that many years any more. The players are bigger, faster, and stronger than in the past. Even Payton’s body would never have held up so many years in today’s game.  And T.O. would not fare well either. The goal of most every team today is to spread the ball out to many receivers as part of the game plan. The days of feeding the ball to the best receiver so much of the time are over. It will be hard to catch Jerry Rice, T.O. and Randy Moss in the record book with the ball being spread around so much in modern football. With computers so much involved in game plans this trend is not likely to get reversed.

Lives like the above raise endless questions about life itself. I never have met T.O., no particular reason I need to. I did stand next to Walter Payton at a car show in Chicago when he was in his heyday and only remember he was hardly taller than I. He weighed however 80 lbs more than I and it was all muscle. So I guess he is like me with 80 lbs more muscle. I have often been asked why I admired T.O. and the way he got to the top of his profession. Given his environment and lack of raw athletic talent, it is extremely unusual for anyone to go as far as he did, to end up as one of the best at his profession all by himself. My own teaching profession put me in contact with hundreds of students born in similar pockets of poverty as T.O. Had he been in one of my classes I probably would never have seen him outside of sitting in class. He would find a way to learn the material on his own. Young people like T.O. have all kinds of hurdles that need to be cleared for them to make any progress with a successful career. Even when helped over some hurdles, endless other hurdles remain, and most such young people, at some point, just run out of energy. They settle for less and never get to the top. T.O. may or may not get to the Hall of Fame. Who gets in there is determined by the media, and much of the media really dislike T.O. But even if he does get in, who is he going to thank for helping him get to the top? He is a rare person who really did it his way. This is not to say that many people, at different points in his career, did not want to help him. But he simply would not trust anyone, and probably still does not. 

Modern science indicates we all have a certain amount of willpower, and it can be used up. T.O. essentially focused all his willpower on one single pursuit. He never spread his willpower out to other areas. The trade off is the chaos in other parts of his life. Walter Payton was a born athlete and he did not need to expend all of his willpower on football. He had a social life, a family, an army of assistants and mentors. So they both got to the top via different routes. Poor Sweetness took a terrible pounding year after year and was dead by age 46. Payton believed if someone was going to tackle him, he needed to be sure he hurt them as much as they were about to hurt him. T.O., especially after a couple of serious injuries, would step out of bounds when a collision was about to happen. Some called it unmanly, T.O. called it stupid to take serious hits for no reason. Payton took it foot by foot, T.O. rounded it out in yards. He thought the foot by foot goal was chump change outside the goal line area. 

Both of these athletes are intriguing, likable, and yet with their share of human flaws. There is a steep cost to get to the top of the football profession. Is the cost worth it?  Sweetness could have at least escaped from dire poverty based on his other inherent talents and personality. T.O.? Not sure of that, his escape was far more difficult given his limited natural abilities, personality, and home environment. On the other hand one could argue that without his ‘strange’ grandmother, where would T.O. be? Probably in a low paying job or in jail.  In the last analysis, while the T.O. persona grates on a lot of people, there are few, if any, football players on any team with him who felt he in any way interfered with their own chances to succeed. He made the team look better by his performance on the field. His work ethic and focus had more of an impact on player attitude than any personal interaction with him could have ever made. In the end the players on his teams were right when they would say, in one way or another that: “T.O. helps us win games. We like having him on the field during games, he is a good teammate.” 

If there was a WillPower Hall of Fame, T.O. would be a shoo-in. Unfortunately willpower is difficult to accurately measure. For most who succeed it is a combination of willpower and talent. And some people with huge willpower succeed by simply exterminating those in their way——Hitler, Stalin, etc are good examples there. Some of the people who have done the most good for society had little more going for them early on but huge willpower. What did Lincoln have going for him at age 21 but his willpower. But this whole topic of willpower gets tangled up with talent at some point. Isn’t strong willpower a talent? T.O. did use his willpower to get to the top, but there are few, if any, destroyed careers in his wake. The media tried to paint T.O. as throwing his quarterbacks under the bus. Really, how many of his quarterbacks ever made the Pro Bowl when T.O. was not on the team? Not very often.

So ‘Sweetness’ and T.O. had a lot in common personality-wise but how they advanced was affected by natural talent vs acquired talent at their position. 
Teammates, for the most part, appreciated both of them. Coaches, for the most part, appreciated both of them, albeit T.O. was by far a greater challenge for coaches. Almost all fans and the media loved ‘Sweetness’. Most fans and the media disliked “T.O.” and his “I am going to love me some me.” Had T.O. been the first player to leap into the stands after a touchdown, a suspension and huge fine would have been the result. “Now that crazy SOB is leaping into the stands.” Peter King would have renewed his demand that Terrell Owens be banned from football. But aside from his ‘irritating’ personality, what crimes has T.O. committed? He has been a perfect citizen, he has no criminal record, no off the field acts of violence, and if his teammates, coaches, and quarterbacks are not against him as a person or teammate, the basis to make him out a ‘bad guy’ crumbles for lack of reality. If ‘I am not the one who got tired” and ‘if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck” are about the only statements used to claim he threw teammates under a bus. He apologized for the latter comment and has long been forgiven by the player involved. 

In the end, ‘Sweetness got the shorter end of the stick.” He died young, mostly likely in part from the huge beating his body took out on the football field. There is no comparison there. T.O. had a bigger well developed body and was perhaps the best physically trained football player out there. Walter was well built to sustain the pounding with bones and muscles a physiological wonder, but organs like the liver are stressed from all the bruises received while being jostled around. He wasn’t even a big person so what there was of him felt the full concentration of those hits. 46 is a young age to die. The fast lane was too much for Walter, a simple kind of person from a rural ghetto. Maybe ‘all that glitters’ is not gold. Of course Walter had a good 30 years of good living. 


T.O. was never in the ‘fast lane’ of social life. He was never even out of his own little bubble in life until he was out of football. What his fate will be the rest of his life is, like his earlier life, an enigma. He remains a ‘loner’ but he gets enough attention from varied sources that he seems, in some respects, to be slowly having some sort of adult ‘childhood’, at least in the sense he is more aware of others, his kids, his financial situation, and even tries out all sorts of new adventures like bowling, diving, some media commentary, acting, and whatever. Shorn now of his created T.O. persona, perhaps he is becoming aware that not everyone is his enemy. At least now people are not in the way of his short term goals. Perhaps he will fare well as an aging loner. Time will tell. 

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Marriages

Marriages

I don’t know, as I start, what I will say about this topic, but it will be fun. First of all I don’t buy the common pitch by some clergy that “what God has put together……..”.  It sounds too much like a trick to upgrade themselves, since if God arranged the marriage He still needs the clergyman to make it official. No one comes to me to get the ‘real deal’ on God. I can understand that. My cat Sheebiejiebee knows as much personally about God as I do. I, like everyone else, know a lot about marriages, having seen many close up, and at a distance—a lot of them.  No, no, no, God certainly did not put together marriages. If so, and I was a judge, good luck trying to get me to dissolve what God put together. 

It is not really clear why clergy are involved, at least in most cases. In many cases if the bride or groom listed the 50 people who know them best, that clergy person would not be involved at all. If we all have a right to marry, then why is anyone else involved in making it official? I thought it was our right, not a right someone else decides we can have. “I, being of sound mind……”. Stop, I have yet to meet anyone of totally sound mind. Maybe, instead of clergy, a psychiatrist should ok a marriage. Just an idea. We can, of course, use a Justice of the Peace to make marriage official. Justice of the Peace?  I am not really sure what a Justice of the Peace even does. Is any judge a Justice of the Peace? Maybe so, but I suspect not. So who decides who is a Justice of the Peace, and on what basis? What kind of courses does one take to be a Justice of the Peace?

Many times someone will say “I can’t believe she/him chose him/her to marry, or he/her chose he/her to marry.” Well, it is not our place to say; every person is free to choose anyone they want to marry. What an absurdity that is. Just like we are not at all free to go into a car dealership and come out with a Cadillac. I have never been married. If I could marry anyone I wanted to marry I would have been married——many times. If one is appearance-challenged or personality-challenged—well, the only hope then is that that you have a lot of money or power or fame. Some people, I reckon, marry for the planned child support. Marry the right wealthy person, have a child, and you might get $40,000 a month for the next 18 years, and ole ugly-ass, after the divorce, is out of the picture. That’s not a marriage, that’s a career choice. 

Marriage is complicated. I can’t imagine how two religious purists could possibly marry unless both inherited the same religion. Otherwise, one way, or the other, any kids are going to some God’s hell. That’s real sad. Sex is simpler than marriage. Sex can be as simple as “your place or mine?”. If it is the wee hours of the morning and both are drunk, then sometimes the parking lot will do. Marriage requires a tad more planning—if I can use the term planning loosely. Planning the marriage is sometimes the most exhausting ordeal the couple will ever experience. And often the costliest aspect of the entire length of the marriage.  Just the cost of making ourselves and the entire wedding party an illusion of attractiveness can be a costly challenge. Sometimes we have to say, “I’m sorry I didn’t recognize you on the street today, I had only seen you before at the wedding.” And what about grandma? At 92 she probably would spoil the heavenly beauty of any wedding pictures. One time, in a park for my walk, this huge wedding party was having their pictures taken in various groupings. I couldn’t resist standing at the end of the back row so I could be in one of the pics. Good luck trying to properly label that picture. At least my fly was zipped up. My Jerry Lewis smile probably stood out well enough. Someone once said to me, “Nothing about your behavior is always appropriate.” 

I really don’t enjoy most weddings. In fact, I don’t enjoy all that much any gathering where I will be chatting for hours with people I will never see again. It’s an attitude problem, a mental disorder of some sort. It is not smart at such gatherings to say anything in depth or controversial (my specialty), which of course could be on just about any topic, lest the whole festive affair end up in angry shouting matches or fisticuffs. Do I really care what someone I will never see again does for a living? No. Do I really care to expound on what I do for a living? No. Do I really care to know anything about kids who I have never seen, or at least will not see again? No. Fortunately, all my many cousins and uncles/aunts live a thousand miles away. The solution was evident enough—you can’t go to just some marriages, anniversaries, birthdays, engagements, and not others, so—to be fair—you go to nothing. If we think we will really be missed at these gala events, we are mistaken. I’ve seen the pictures, sometimes by the hundreds, of the gala event, and nobody is in tears over my absence. In fact most are smiling, perhaps precisely because I am not there. Give people what they want and they will smile every time. 

Weddings are obviously a most exciting and satisfying event for the lucky couple. The trouble is, tomorrow will come soon enough, and what to do for an encore? With time the wedding dress will be as wrinkled as her face and his stomach will dispel any illusion of handsome youthfulness. No longer will it be grandma who is ruining the beauty of wedding pictures. They say by age 50 everyone has the face they deserve. And some Donald Trump impersonator will make everyone take note of it.

Are marriages meant to last? That’s a tricky question. The only constant in life is change. We all know that. So marriage is essentially a gamble that both partners in marriage will change in ways which will strengthen the marriage, or at least let it hang together as some sort of convenient arrangement. There probably is nothing better than a good marriage and nothing worse than a bitter divorce. 
Being single is probably in the middle somewhere, as are most marriages. What can we really make of divorce rates? I suspect, if many people could really divorce and be able to attract someone of their dreams, divorce would be a lot more common. Most people in a marriage are well aware of their market value should they divorce. And if they are not aware, they rudely find out. “You don’t like to talk much? You are sexually over the hill? You are financially stable? Great, let’s get married.”  Older people often meet other older people who they enjoy being around, but going to bed with them? If someone never understood the connection between youth and sex, they sure will at that point in their lives. It is not so much the sex drive that goes as it is the opportunity to have sex with those who would make the sex appealing. There probably are exceptions-—God bless them. It is said that sex can be great in old age, but porn sites don’t seem to bear this out. I suppose if the lights are dim enough at least laughter will not be the predominant emotional achievement. Crying will be.

We are all aware that half the people who marry in the U.S. end up divorced, that people tend to marry at a later age, that fewer people ever get married. The notion of no marriage, no sex has fallen out of vogue. It is almost the opposite now in that many feel a couple better find out before marriage just how sexually compatible they are. With availability of sex more casual than ever, more people simply are leery of marriage. With job stability and financial security more elusive than ever, many people fear the financial cost of any failed marriage. Probably the endless internet and media gadgets ,with endless ‘friends’ on Facebook, chat rooms, twittering, etc make marriage less necessary. In the past a person could feel rather alone in the world without being married. Today, to put it bluntly, marriage as a social necessity is less important. Right and wrong in the marriage arena have given way to advantages vs disadvantages. Marriage has never been a clear cut well defined social institution. Now it is less well defined than ever. People are freer to define their own personal relationship with any ‘significant other’. When two people are living together today and one wants to get a message to one of the couple and can’t remember their name one is stumped: “Tell ______I will return the book I borrowed tomorrow. What goes in the blank? Use the wrong classification and one ends up embarrassed, like “that is not my fiancee, that is my boyfriend!” I suppose that is better than being told “That is not my boyfriend, that is my husband”. Maybe all couples need wear neck bands, the color of which clearly classifies their correct title. I make it very simple. I always answer to “Hey You”.   

Some say sex is God’s greatest gift to man, along with marriage. Does that mean God has many spouses and has sex twenty four hours a day? How would God find time to exempt me, via prayer, from the laws which govern the evolutionary process, if he is busy all the time Himself enjoying the ‘greatest’ gifts he has to give? How come God never looks upon the most sexually attractive, and snatches them up for his own catch?  What the hell does God look like anyway?  He must look like something. Who would want to have no physical appearance? That’s seems a tad creepy to me. Try to envision what God looks like. Good luck with that. Maybe those who God talks to know—like Jerry Faulwell, Mike Huckleberry, the Pope, and I can’t remember the others. My mother used to say I don’t listen to anyone, but I think, properly introduced, I would listen to God. I doubt God speaks in any human dialect, maybe just implants good thoughts in our brain. If so I hope in the next musing better thoughts about the topic get planted. 

Well, time enough for me to stop here. This is the longest musing which has shed the least light on the subject at hand. Ray Charles was blind and he still did not settle on a steady sex partner or be a loyal husband. That seems strange to me. “Ray, what’s the matter, don’t I appeal to you sexually anymore? What is it that you are looking for? I mean, damn it, you can’t even see anything.”  Ray Charles doesn’t even have to close his eyes to pretend during sex. Neither do drunks after closing time. It would take a porcupine for them to snap into reality.

I have to go now—go out hunting for a sexy young blind partner for sex and marriage. I will describe myself to them as best I can, and fibbing about age is a minor sin. Sounds like a perfect marriage to me—one of those ‘till death do we part’ ones, albeit not a long lasting marriage at my age. 

P.S. Marriages are usually very joyous, uplifting, and exciting events, both for the couple and their friends. But not always. In fact I participated in one of the strangest marriages since Tiny Tim married Vicky. When I was  graduate student at the Univ of Wisconsin, way back in the 60’s, a group of us, maybe 8 or so, would usually have dinner together in the student union. One night the place was crowded for some reason, and there were no large tables available, so two of us asked this older guy if we could sit at the same table he was at. He said ok and I don’t think participated in any conversation but laughed whenever we laughed. The next day, when our group was seated at a large table the same older guy asked if could sit at the table. He then remarked that he hated eating alone. His name was Gino and he was no problem at all. Rarely said anything, just laughed whenever we laughed. If we tried to bring him into a conversation by asking what he was up to these days he would just say ’Nothing, I just go to the movies by myself once in a while.” He worked at the Wisconsin Historical Society across the street. Of course after a couple of years or so all in the group graduated and we went our separate ways. Maybe 5- 10 years later, I can’t be precise here, the phone rings when I lived down in Chicago, many hours away from Madison, Wis. “This is Gino, you probably don’t remember me”. “Well, refresh my memory”. He did. “Ok, I remember you, how are you Gino.” “I need a favor bad.” A little birdie told me I better hang up. But I didn’t. “What kind of favor Gino?”  “ I am getting married and want you to come to the wedding” “Well, that is certainly nice of you Gino, but I am out of state now and nowhere near you anymore.”  “I know, but I need you to be the best man for the wedding.”“You must be joking Gino, I hardly know you”. “I remember one time you rented a row boat and took me out on Lake Mendota next to the cafeteria. I really enjoyed that.”  “Well, if I recall, that was to show you there are things you could do with your time besides go to a movie. I don’t think that elevates me to best man at your wedding.”  “I can’t think of anyone else, I am in a terrible spot here.” “Can you call me back in an hour Gino? I have someone here but we can talk then” “Ok”. Of course there was no one with me, but I was thunderstruck by the conversation. Gino getting married was amazing. And to have no one but me as a candidate for best man was really depressing. It made me feel very uncomfortable that anyone could be so friendless—-Another real picture from life’s other side. He called back. “Ok, Gino I will put this on my calendar and make it top priority. I will be very pleased to help you out here.” “The priest says there is a rehearsal the night before.” Ok, Gino get a piece of paper and write this down. I will be there for the wedding itself . Tell the priest to simplify my role and we will wing it. I think all I have to do is hand you the ring. I can’t stay for any reception, I need to get back home the same day. Things are busy for me down here. If the Priest encourages you to pick someone else don’t you dare say there is no one else to ask.  Don’t make that kind of comment to anyone. You pick the best man, not anyone else” So up I went and the guests were all her family and maybe a few of her friends. She was a good foot taller than Gino, who was short and rotund. After the wedding I went out to dinner with some friends I knew in Wisconsin. I didn’t want to be at the reception and have people pressing me about Gino. I barely knew the guy. That little venture on the lake was the total interaction with Gino outside of him sitting at the dinner table at the Student Union.

Maybe a year later I was in Madison and I think myself and a friend named Phil was along. We paid a visit to Gino up in the Historical Society. He had a desk in this huge but dungeon like room. “How’s married life Gino” “That didn’t work out, we are divorced.”  Before leaving I spotted the former wife at the other end of the room. “Should I say hello to her Gino?”  “No, we are not on speaking terms.” So many times in life I am reminded of Wordsworth’s words: 
           
             “For I have learned
      To look on nature, not as in the hour
      Of thoughtless youth; but hearing oftentimes                    
      The still, sad music of humanity”


I vowed to visit Gino, maybe take him to lunch, every time I was near Madison. Maybe get him out on a row boat again. Certainly I can spare the time to do something unselfish and kind to someone so alone in life. So not that long after I went into the bowels of the Wisconsin Historical Society again to say hi to Gino. “I am sorry, Gino is dead.” I wonder what happens to someone like that when they die? Probably no one to handle anything and the county must handle the matter. I mean “wow”—the highlight of his life is that someone took him out on Lake Mendota for a boat ride. Gino was not retarded, he had a college degree. I know, I am making the wrong case to win the argument here. As T.O. liked to say, “Fair is fair” and he would have done the same thing for Gino. In fact, in retrospect I blew it. I should of inquired whether he had someone to handle his estate to make sure any money went where it should go. I don’t recall he had any family at the wedding. Any money in a situation like that should go to a charity of his choosing. Obviously there was no one in his life who remotely was deserving of any inheritance. But somebody probably got the money. What a farce. Maybe there was no money.