Popular Culture Archives - Page 2 of 78

Kitchie Ohh: Overwhelmed

Overwhelmed

Hello, again. I’m not sure you even noticed, but last month’s blog contained no spillage from my brain onto your screen. I literally lost track of the days, they blurred together. I lost track of time, and, if I’m honest, myself. Did August even happen?

It wasn’t just last month. This entire year has been difficult to say the least. Sure it had it’s absolutely wonderful moments, but for someone like me who lives for balance, the scale seems to have, so far, been tipped entirely in the favor of the not so great. From starting the year with an emergency phone call about an injured parent to multiple stressful shifts in my professional life, an entirely unexpected death that I am still processing, and the sudden and steadily declining mental and physical state of my only living grandparent, the zillion other things resulting from these events, and so many additional things on top of it all with more to come, 2024 has steadily provided me with more things to worry and overthink about than I’ve ever experienced.

The worst part about all of it, for me, it twofold. First, knowing I have absolutely zero control over anything that has taken place. Being fully aware of that but unable to stop myself from the “what if” thoughts can be almost paralyzing at times. Second, I have a near-daily battle with myself that I shouldn’t be stressed or complaining about anything because other people have it so much worse than I do. While the second thought started as a way to psych myself OUT of oncoming downward emotional spirals, it has turned into yet another weapon to beat myself up with. Instead of shaking me out of the funk with thinking about all the good, it has been driving me deeper. I find myself feeling guilty for, well, feeling. Trust me, I realize how ridiculous that sounds.

Ok, maybe the issue is threefold. I have always found it incredibly difficult to express big emotions, or to ask for help when I’m stressed and overwhelmed. I would rather take everything on myself rather than show that I’m struggling. I’m fine. This is fine. Everything is fine. I got this. My go-to self-preservation act is to pull back into myself and away from everyone the second I don’t have to be “on” anymore; after work or family engagements, I’d say social activities too, but if I’m being honest here, they haven’t been a thing for me in ages. I realized, just recently, why that is: keeping up the appearance, the expectation that Kat’s great, she can handle anything, is absolutely exhausting. My brain feels like an ancient overheating desktop computer with dial-up internet and too many browser tabs open and I can’t tell which one is playing that annoying music. It’s no wonder I can’t recall a single day in the past few months that I was awake beyond 830pm, or that I got up as soon as my alarm went off to start the day instead of hitting snooze at least three times. I handle the bare minimum of what’s expected of me, with smile plastered on my face, and sometimes accomplishing that is even a stretch.

I think the most important thing to come from the chaos of this past year, is some solid reminders that despite all my best efforts to convince the world I’m perfectly fine, a handful of people still see through my bullshit. They catch me off guard with expressions of love and support, seeming to know exactly when I need them. They force me to accept help that I refused to ask for but desperately needed. They listen when I vent, or allow me to sit in absolute silence without expecting me to say a thing because I just need to not be alone with my thoughts. They don’t judge or tell me I shouldn’t feel what I’m feeling because others have it worse – they know I do enough of that to myself. Most importantly, they don’t make a big deal out of being there for me. It’s just between us, not a demonstration or unveiling of all I’ve been hiding from the world. They also accept my grumbled words of appreciation that come paired with variations of “you did’t have to” and “this is my mess, not yours” type statements and sarcastic, self-deprecating comments on my own mental and emotional state. Because they know, they really know, what I mean and how hard it would be for me to say any other way.

There’s a lot that I have to process and more to come, that’s just how life works. I’m alive. I’m grateful. I’m loved. I’m not exactly fine, but I will be.

Kitchie Ohh is a full-time professional fundraiser who has worked with a number of health and human services nonprofits in the Philadelphia area over the last 20 years. She found her passion for modeling after a pinup-style photoshoot in 2013. Since then, she has worked with many talented photographers, stylists, hair and makeup artists in a variety of styles. She has been featured in- and on the covers of – multiple print and digital publications. Over the years, she has branched out from pinup studio modeling to serve as a figure model for live sketching, walked a runway, and was part of two campaigns for Philadelphia designer K. Vaughn.

In addition to her philanthropy-focused career, she has volunteered with art, historical, and community organizations, and even the events team of a local brewery for a while, pre-pandemic.

You’re just as likely to find her whipping up something deliciously plant-based in her kitchen or knitting a sweater as you are to find her on a photography set. Her motto is “be both.” The model and the homemaker, sultry and sweet, serious and silly. All the things, all at once. To access additional articles by Kitchie Ohh, link here: https://tonyward.com/kitchie-ohh-a-muse-in-grief/

Online Dating

Online Dating

Swipe Right, Swipe Wrong: The Successes, Risks, and Failures of Online Dating

In today’s fast-paced, digitally-driven world, online dating has emerged as a popular avenue for finding love, connection, or even a fleeting encounter. With millions of users globally, platforms like Tinder, Bumble, and Match.com have revolutionized the way people meet and form relationships. However, the journey from a virtual match to a real-life connection is fraught with both potential successes and significant risks, as well as the possibility of failure.

The Successes: Love at First Swipe

The success stories are compelling. Many couples have found long-lasting relationships, marriages, and even families through online dating platforms. The accessibility and diversity these platforms offer allow users to connect with people they might never have met otherwise. For those with busy lifestyles, online dating offers a convenient way to meet like-minded individuals. The ability to filter potential matches by interests, values, and goals increases the likelihood of finding a compatible partner. For some, the anonymity of online communication can help build confidence and foster open, honest dialogue that might be difficult in face-to-face encounters.

The Risks: The Double-Edged Sword of Anonymity

However, the anonymity that facilitates open conversation can also be a breeding ground for deceit. One of the most significant risks of online dating is the potential for encountering dishonesty. From fake profiles to catfishing, where individuals pretend to be someone they’re not, the online dating world can be a minefield. There’s also the danger of scams, where fraudsters exploit emotional vulnerabilities for financial gain. Moreover, online dating can expose users to harassment and unwanted advances, with the safety of personal information becoming a major concern.

The Failures: When Expectations Meet Reality

Despite the potential for success, not all online dating experiences end well. The reality of meeting someone in person can starkly contrast with the carefully curated online persona. Misaligned expectations, whether about physical appearance, personality, or intentions, often lead to disappointment. Additionally, the sheer volume of choices on dating platforms can lead to a paradox of choice, where users find it challenging to commit to a single person, always wondering if someone “better” is just a swipe away.

In conclusion, online dating offers incredible opportunities to find meaningful connections but not without its pitfalls. Success requires careful navigation of the risks and a healthy dose of realism when translating a virtual relationship into real life. For every love story born online, there are tales of caution that remind us that the digital age of romance is as complex as it is convenient.

The Roberts Supreme Court: Shaping The Freedoms of American Citizens

Portrait of John Roberts Supreme Court — John G Roberts Jr.

The Roberts Supreme Court

Shaping The Freedoms of American Citizens

The Roberts Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., has significantly influenced the landscape of American law, impacting the freedoms and rights of citizens in profound ways. Since Roberts’ appointment in 2005, the Court has navigated a complex array of issues, from voting rights to religious liberties, that have far-reaching consequences for the future of American democracy.

One of the most notable aspects of the Roberts Court is its conservative tilt, particularly following the appointments of Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. This conservative majority has led to decisions that have redefined the balance between state and federal powers, individual rights, and governmental authority. For example, in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Court dismantled key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which had been instrumental in protecting minority voting rights. The decision shifted the responsibility of oversight from the federal government to the states, resulting in a wave of new voting laws that critics argue have made it more difficult for some citizens to exercise their right to vote.

Religious freedom is another area where the Roberts Court has left its mark. The Court has expanded the scope of religious liberties, often at the expense of other constitutional rights. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), the Court ruled that closely-held for-profit corporations could refuse to provide contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act if it conflicted with the owners’ religious beliefs. This decision marked a significant moment in the intersection of religious freedom and women’s rights, raising concerns about the potential for religious liberties to be used as a basis for limiting other freedoms.

The Roberts Court has also played a pivotal role in the ongoing debates over Second Amendment rights. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court affirmed an individual’s right to possess firearms, striking down Washington D.C.’s handgun ban. This ruling set a precedent that has been instrumental in subsequent cases, shaping the national dialogue on gun control and individual rights.

Looking forward, the Roberts Court is likely to continue influencing the direction of American freedoms, especially as it confronts issues related to technology, privacy, and executive power. The decisions made by this Court will have long-lasting implications, determining how future generations of Americans understand and exercise their freedoms. As the nation navigates a rapidly changing social and political landscape, the rulings of the Roberts Supreme Court will remain central to shaping the future of American liberties.

Politics: Who is Leonard Leo?

Portrait of Leonard Leo for article on right wing Lunatics — Who is Leonard Leo?

Politics: Who is Leonard Leo?

Leonard Leo: The Power Broker Behind America’s Judicial Shift

In the landscape of American politics, few individuals wield as much behind-the-scenes influence as Leonard Leo. As the former executive vice president of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization, Leo has played a pivotal role in reshaping the judiciary to reflect a more conservative philosophy. This has raised concerns about the long-term implications of his influence on the state of democracy in the USA.

The Architect of Conservative Judicial Dominance

Leonard Leo’s career is a testament to the power of strategic legal maneuvering. He has been instrumental in the nomination and confirmation of several Supreme Court justices, including John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. These appointments have shifted the Supreme Court to a solid conservative majority, potentially affecting rulings on key issues for decades.

Leo’s influence extends beyond the Supreme Court. He has been involved in placing conservative judges in lower federal courts, thereby shaping the judiciary at multiple levels. This systematic approach ensures that conservative legal principles influence a broad spectrum of legal decisions, from district courts to the highest court in the land.

Political Beliefs and Judicial Philosophy

Leonard Leo’s political beliefs are grounded in a strict interpretation of the Constitution, often referred to as originalism. This philosophy argues that the Constitution should be interpreted based on the original understanding of its text at the time it was written. While this approach has its merits, critics argue that it can lead to regressive rulings that do not consider the evolving context of modern society.

Leo’s influence has been particularly pronounced in cases involving reproductive rights, affirmative action, voting rights, and environmental regulations. The conservative majority he helped build has made significant rulings, such as the rollback of Roe v. Wade, which underscores the profound impact of his judicial strategy.

The Dangers to Democracy

The consolidation of judicial power in the hands of a particular ideology poses significant dangers to the state of democracy. A judiciary that consistently rules in favor of conservative principles can undermine progressive legislation, even when it reflects the will of the majority. This can lead to a disconnect between public opinion and judicial outcomes, eroding trust in democratic institutions.

One of the most concerning aspects of Leo’s influence is the potential for entrenching minority rule. The conservative legal philosophy often supports decisions that favor the interests of the powerful over those of marginalized groups. This can exacerbate existing inequalities and hinder efforts to achieve social justice.

Moreover, the emphasis on originalism can hinder the judiciary’s ability to adapt to contemporary challenges. Issues like climate change, digital privacy, and evolving social norms require a judiciary capable of interpreting the Constitution in a manner that addresses present-day realities. A rigid adherence to originalism can stifle this necessary evolution, leaving the judiciary ill-equipped to protect the rights and interests of future generations.

The Path Forward

Addressing the challenges posed by Leonard Leo’s influence requires a multifaceted approach. First, there is a need for greater transparency in the judicial nomination process. The involvement of secretive organizations and dark money in shaping the judiciary undermines public trust and accountability.

Second, there must be a concerted effort to balance the ideological composition of the courts. This includes advocating for judicial nominees who represent a broader spectrum of legal philosophies and ensuring that the judiciary reflects the diversity of the American populace.

Finally, it is crucial to engage in robust civic education to foster a deeper understanding of the judiciary’s role in democracy. An informed public is better equipped to hold leaders accountable and advocate for a judiciary that upholds democratic principles.

Conclusion

Leonard Leo’s legacy is a testament to the profound impact one individual can have on the judicial landscape. While his influence has solidified a conservative stronghold in the judiciary, it also highlights the fragility of democratic institutions. Ensuring a judiciary that reflects the evolving values of society and maintains the trust of the public is essential for the health of American democracy. As the nation grapples with these challenges, the lessons of Leonard Leo’s influence serve as both a cautionary tale and a call to action.

Bob Shell: Oklahoma, You’re Not Ok

Illustration of the Oklahoma landscape by A.I. — Illustration of the Oklahoma Landscape created by a Conversation With A.I.

Oklahoma, You’re Not Ok

I just learned that the government of Oklahoma has mandated the teaching of the Bible in public schools.

My first question: Which Bible? There are many different translations, some of which differ substantially from others. It is well known among biblical scholars that the King James Version (KJV) contains many mistakes and mistranslations. Just one example, Jesus (Yeshua) was said to have stated that it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.

Actually, the word mistranslated as camel really means a hawser, a thick rope. The correct translation makes a lot more sense.

In 324 AD, the counsel of Nicea was held by church elders to determine which of the many gospels were to be included in the official New Testament. Many books that were just as valid as those chosen were excluded, books such as The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Mary, The Gospel of Judas, and many others were excluded for purely political reasons having nothing to do with religion.

The Jesus who appears in The Gospel of Thomas speaks not of sin and salvation, but of illusion and enlightenment. Instead of coming to save us from sin, he comes as a guide who opens access to spiritual understanding. Once the disciple attains enlightenment, Jesus no longer serves as a spiritual master; the two have become equal — even identical.

“Jesus said, ‘I am not your master. Because you have drunk, you have become drunk from the bubbling spring which I have measured out … He who will drink from my mouth will become as I am: I myself shall become he, and the things that are hidden will be revealed to him.'” — The Gospel of Thomas.

He is practically Buddhist in his philosophy. Of course, the teachings of the Buddha had reached the community of Hellenized Jews living in Palestine where Jesus lived long before Jesus, and he seems to have been exposed to Eastern thought early in his life.

I have used the name ‘Jesus’ here for convenience, although his actual Aramaic name was Yeshua. Elsewhere in the Bible that name is translated as Joshua. Jesus is what the Romans called him, because their alphabet had no Y letter and replaced it with J, and in Latin most proper names end in us. So Yeshua was transliterated into Jesus.

Jesus was also familiar with the Cabalah. The prayer usually translated as “For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, forever and ever, amen,” is actually the Cabalistic Cross: “Ateh Malkuth, veh Geburah,veh Gedula, le olam, amen,” in Aramaic. It refers to the sephira on the Cabalistic Tree of Life. A better translation is: “Unto you, the Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory, unto the Aeons, it is finished.”

It is well-known that the supposed last words of Jesus on the cross: “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabach thenai,” are not Aramaic or Hebrew, or even Latin or Greek. Colonel James Churchward, an expert on the Mayan language, said they were Mayan. They mean, “I am fading, I am fading, darkness covers my face.”

For what it’s worth, the Mormons have always believed that Jesus voyaged to the New World and preached to the native population. Perhaps that’s true. Many people were crossing the Atlantic Ocean in those times.

We know as well that many biblical tales are simply retelling of much older stories from the Sumerians, such as the story of Noah’s flood. That was borrowed completely from The Epic of Gilgamesh, written centuries earlier.

The dying and resurrected god is a common thread in many mythologies. Osiris of Egypt is one example.

The Bible, Old Testament and New, is, quite simply, a collection of myths mixed with a bit of history, many of its stories regurgitated from older civilizations. Anyone believing otherwise is a fool. The texts contradict themselves over and over, although less so in the Old Testament, some of which appears to be accurate history.

But a far more important question than which Bible is whether other sacred books like the Quran, Torah, Hindu scriptures, Buddhist scriptures, Jain scriptures, Norse Eddas, etc., etc. will also be taught in Oklahoma schools and given the equal time and credence they deserve.

I believe it would be appropriate to teach the Bible in public schools in the context of a course in comparative religions or one in comparative mythology. But teaching it as fact is criminal.

Biblical literalists simply do not understand what they are talking about. It can’t all be true.

Legitimate biblical scholars have concluded that Mark is the oldest gospel, written around 60 – 80 AD, and that the other three synoptic gospels were based on it and a lost scripture they’ve called Q. That’s from the German word Quelle, which means ‘Source.’ Why German? Because the scholars who did the research are German. Much important biblical scholarship has only been published in German.

I went into all of this and much more in my 2019 book COSMIC DANCE.

The founders of the United States recognized the dangers of an establishment religion like those they’d seen back in England and Europe. They wisely incorporated separation of church and state in our constitution. Oklahoma would seek to overturn that important principle of our country.

I am reasonably certain that courts will rule that Oklahoma’s idea is unconstitutional, but with the current Supreme Court nothing is certain.