The United States' Ugly Divorce ... and the remarriage to follow

I haven't written in a while; since May to be exact. There's been stuff. Personal. Professional. Malaise has set in. A funk. I'd been blaming it on that "stuff," but now I have a more layered theory. You see, I'm not the only one with it. I'm not the only one who is distracted, maybe a little less energetic than usual, maybe a bit mopey, perhaps even pessimistic. Nope. There's a collective energy in the United States and it's down in the dumps.

I believe it has to do at least in part with our country's marriage to W. After 8 long years of marriage, now we're in the midst of a messy separation. Our housing is getting pulled out from under us. Our money is disappearing. Just when we thought it couldn't possibly get any uglier, our boss lays us off.

The thing is, though -- and what truly concerns me most -- is that we're already looking to a new spouse/partner/lover/significant other to save us; to make it all better. Regardless of our political preference, both candidates have been elevated to savior-like status relative to fixing the current state of funk in the United States. For many voters, there's that belief that once a new president is in place (i.e.: the divorce has been finalized), the malaise will be lifted, order restored, and money will be back in our pockets. I think this hope is particularly true in regard to those of us who are voting for Obama. In fact, many are outright afraid of the potential state of things to come if he is not elected.

Yet what if he is elected? The remarriage will be quick, instantaneous in fact, as the divorce from W. in January is finalized and Obama is sworn in just moments later. Remember, this has been an ugly, ugly separation. We've lost money, housing, and our pride, not to mention important friendships or friendly relations with other countries. I think many of us believe that the new marriage will make it all better. Yet it doesn't work that way. Any professional in the field of divorce knows that people are bound to repeat old patterns in new relationships, particularly if they re-marry quickly on the heels of a fresh -- and ugly -- divorce.

So we need to do ourselves and the new president a favor. We need to dig deep and consider what WE may have contributed to the current state of things in this country. Okay, yeah, sure W. certainly messed up a whole heck of a lot but didn't we make individual choices along the way? Any marriage is based on dynamics and patterns of interaction. Everyone brings baggage into that. How can we prevent that baggage from carrying over into the new presidency? If we don't consider this, we're bound to repeat at least some of the same mistakes we made in our last marriage. We did make choices. We can't pretend we didn't.

So let's remain hopeful about the positive ways in which a new president could lift this country, yet let's also take control of our own destiny. Yeah, there's "stuff" happening. It's hard to fight the funk right now. But neither Obama, nor McCain, could ever do it alone. We all want to feel better, but first we need to take a close look at the individual choices we've made that got us here. Then we need to put on our dancing shoes, our funky (rather than funk) music, with a smile and a nod for every single neighbor, family member, friend, and stranger who crosses our path because sometimes doing happy is the only way to make it be.

Digital Image Content © 2008 Alexander Yakovlev | Dreamstime.com.
All Rights Reserved

screening The Sari Soldiers in the classroom

We had an interesting classroom discussion following the screening of The Sari Soldiers on Monday. You can read my previous post about the documentary here.

I'm going to attempt to discuss the classroom experience without giving away too much about the film. As I mentioned in my previous post, this is a film that really needs to be seen and I don't want to ruin that experience for anyone. At the same time, in the interest of exposing other teachers and conflict resolution professionals to this documentary, I think it's important to describe the ways in which the students interacted with it and how it informed other aspects of the course.

Immediately upon the conclusion of the film the students appeared as though they might burst from their seats with eagerness to express their thoughts about it. To put that into context, this was a group of graduate students from whom I had to pull words over and over again the first few weeks. Energy and enthusiasm increased over the course of the term, but this degree of engagement was on a whole other level all together. They had been moved by the film both as individuals and as a conflict resolution class and they were responding to it from a point of intersection between the two. The class discussion was more branched than linear, but I'll do my best to describe it.

One student said that "I kept waiting for the good guy to emerge ..." and later he explained that "people could see each perspective and decide for themselves." Essentially, to this student, the filmmaker had presented all sides equally. Others wholeheartedly agreed.

There were questions about what has since happened to the women who were featured in the movie. There were questions about the current state of Nepal, the country in which the documentary is filmed.

The students talked about the strong women who were highlighted in the movie, and wondered about the role of women in Nepal. One student referenced the readings we've been doing in the Handbook of Conflict Resolution edited by Deutsch and Coleman and explained: "it was interesting reading about different models of conflict resolution and particularly how the narrative model is about telling stories because that is what happens in this documentary. Even if it wasn’t part of the culture for women to have the strong role these women had, their stories have now been told and those stories are now part of the culture."

Many, if not all of the students agreed that the more violent scenes were filmed and edited with "tact" and "respect" for the people involved and to the conflict in general. A number of students were concerned that it might be hard to obtain justice for all the families whose loved ones were "disappeared."

Finally, they inquired as to when they might see the documentary become available to rent or buy. Many wanted to watch it again and to show it to friends, spouses, classmates and numerous others. They laughed when I explained that I had "negotiated" for an early copy of the documentary given that we had spent a good deal of class time developing their negotiating knowledge. I responded with well, you gotta use the skills you have.

This movie made real previous class discussions about negotiation, power, gender roles & conflict, justice, moral exclusion, caste and class based discrimination, revenge, forgiveness, human rights, oppression, intractable conflict and various other essential concepts for understanding conflict and conflict resolution.

This movie is important to the field of conflict resolution, but more importantly, perhaps, is that it's just a darn good film with relevancy across numerous contexts.

The Sari Soldiers: A documentary that every conflict resolution professional and student of conflict resolution needs to see

According to the Butter Lamp Films, LLC website: “Filmed over three years during the most historic and pivotal time in Nepal’s modern history, The Sari Soldiers is an extraordinary story of six women’s courageous efforts to shape Nepal’s future in the midst of an escalating civil war against Maoist insurgents, and the King’s crackdown on civil liberties.” The website goes on to describe it in further detail, illustrating the complexities of the stories that were captured in this film. Yet there are ways in which writing about it cannot do this documentary justice. This is truly a film that needs to be seen – I’ve already seen it twice.

The first time I watched this documentary it was at an intimate screening that I attended with a filmmaker friend who is friends with the director and co-producer of The Sari Soldiers. I knew nothing about the film, had no expectations going into it, and just kept thinking while I was watching it this is huge for the field of conflict resolution. Unlike most documentaries -- particularly ones made by American directors -- I could find no hidden or outspoken agenda in this film. There were six interwoven stories seen through the eyes of six strong and unique women, all told with equal parts empathy. Combined, these stories revealed what conflict resolution professionals have known for years: there can be multiple truths to any conflict. My first viewing took place last fall and since then I have worked to bring this documentary into my graduate studies course in conflict resolution. With permission of the filmmaker and distributor, I will be showing this movie to my students in class next week.

The course I teach is essentially a survey of conflict resolution theory and application, yet I have pushed them toward learning some of the more complex concepts within the field. We began with some foundational learning and conflict resolution basics (win/win, integrative vs. distributive) but in recent weeks have moved on to discussions about culture and bias in conflict resolution, intractable conflict, and next week, international and religious conflict resolution. I believe that over the previous seven, pretty intense weeks, we have created a safe but challenging learning environment where each student has something valuable to contribute. I have warned them that The Sari Soldiers is intense and at times graphic but I am confident that together we can handle anything that comes up for them during and after the in-class screening.

I would not show this movie to every group of conflict resolution students in every possible context, yet I truly believe that every student of conflict resolution must see it. Therein lies a contradiction of sorts, but like with this documentary, seemingly opposite realities can be simultaneously true. Perhaps a documentary filmmaker and a conflict resolution professor or professional are not that different. Both must develop relationships and earn trust of participants, and both must know when to get out of their way. A project is oftentimes most successful when we create a space in which participants can safely speak for themselves. That is the gift that this documentary gives to the field of conflict resolution and it is something I hope to extend throughout the rest of this course.

The Sari Soldiers will be having its North American Premiere at the Human Rights Watch International Film Festival in New York City in June, and is going to be the "Center Piece" Film for the festival. Go to www.hrw.org/iff/2008/ny for more information. The Sari Soldiers will soon be released on DVD through Women Make Movies.

I will post a follow-up after the in-class screening.

remembering a friend and colleague

Most mediators probably didn't know Sherri Bilinski. She had been mediating for less than 4 years. We had started mediating custody and visitation cases for the courts in Chicago within weeks of one another in the spring of '04. While I had been mediating for some time, Sherri had been a therapist previously and mediation was new to her. You wouldn't have known it, though. After going through an outside 40-hour training and some internal training, Sherri got the process deep down in her bones. More importantly, she was damn good at it.

At the age of 53, Sherri died in her sleep of natural causes either late on Friday, March 28th or in the early morning hours of the 29th. She had been having escalating health issues, but nothing that appeared life threatening. While I had been worrying about her for some time, her death still came as a major shock. Perhaps most difficult was that I received the news from a friend at my old workplace, Sherri's employer, 1 hour before I was to attend a wake for my closest childhood friend's father. There's just nothing that can prepare you for that.

In addition to being a wonderful therapist, mediator, and friend, Sherri was also an artist, although she hadn't painted for some time. She had recently been able to read again as her pain finally lessened enough for her to concentrate on written words. I had given her the book Kite Runner two years ago and she called me sometime in February to tell me that she had finally read it and to exclaim over what a gift it had been -- both the act of reading and the brilliance of the book itself.

Sherri's home and office were decked in shades of purple with lavender in its various forms throughout. She had hoped to be able to dance again one day. She went out for a drink after work with a few of us one time, something that took a lot out of her. It was nice to see the sparkle it brought her, though, despite the effort it took. I think of her when I am cooking, because there were many evenings when we'd talk on the phone while I was making dinner ("What is Miss Laura cooking tonight?" she'd ask. She never did get a taste of my homemade bread). I miss her when I smell lavender. When I hear someone laugh, I realize I will never again hear hers. Her sense of humor was vast and it sustained us both through some shared, and some individual, personal and professional challenges. There were days when we talked on the phone for hours.

I didn't get to say goodbye to Sherri -- we had exchanged voicemail virtually every day the week leading up to her death -- but I had spent a day with her a few weeks earlier helping her get to and from a medical appointment. Her strength that day, and every day that I knew her, was subtle, beautiful, and human. She felt things deeply and spoke with honesty. She showed kindness and respect to others but could also be like "a lioness protecting her cubs" as she sometimes put it, when someone did her, or someone she loved, wrong.

There's no way to fill the space left by Sherri's death. Many of us lost a great friend. The field of Conflict Resolution lost a terrific mediator. I feel like I should close with something funny, but that was always Sherri's role. Instead, I'll close my eyes, smell some lavender, and think brilliant purple thoughts in her honor.

"Man up": What's Gender Got to Do With It?

I've been hearing people say "man up" for about a year now. Well, not "people" exactly as in lots of them, but more like twenty or thirty-something men and women. It reminded me of the phrase "be a man" that I often heard as a kid, so I became curious and did some "research" via Google.

According to Urban Dictionary, an online site where anyone can post a slang word or phrase along with its definition and then have it approved or disapproved by users (with potentially competing definitions) the following are the top 4 definitions for "man up":

1)Don't be a pussy, brave it, be daring.
Example:
"Hey man, finish this bowl."
"No dude, I'm baked as it is."
"Come on pussy, man up."

2)to fulfill your responsibilities as a man, despite your insecurities and constant ability to place yourself in embarrassing and un-manly scenarios.
Example:
Paul forcefully imposed the bet on everyone, yet he was the first to fail miserably on the very challenge he had conjured up.
Paul must now man up and meet his own challenge.

3)A reminder, usually to a man, to maintain or resume his assigned place within patriarchy. A reminder to a man never to show uncertainty, express feelings or emotion, display lack of skill, give any indication of empathy, give voice to pain or suffering, or otherwise act like a human being rather than an automaton.
Example:
Sergeant: Kill those people, Private.
Private: But they're all unarmed civilians - mostly women, old people, and children!
Sergeant: MAN UP, Private!
Private: Yes sir! *opens fire*

4)Be strong
Take control, take control of a (the) situation, be strong, rise to the moment

I found these definitions pretty interesting and consistent with the context in which I had been hearing them. Yet I was still curious about the origins of the phrase. I dug a little deeper and found additional information about "man up", even a book with the phrase in the title. The book: Man Up: Nobody is Coming to Save Us by Steve Perry is described on Amazon as: "...a hard hitting, introspective look into what the Black community must do to save itself. Finally, a voice speaks to the complex relationship between personal and community responsibility." I also found "Man UP Sweepstakes" offered by Mike and Mike on ESPN and an article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette entitled "It's time to 'man up' from Friday, February 08, 2008. The article reads in part:

I had a conversation with Lee Davis a few nights ago. Lee, 35, is an outreach coordinator with Community Empowerment Association. He works with about two dozen young people and their families to try to keep the youth on track. After last week's horrific violence, I wanted to get some perspective from someone has a nonstop close-up view of what's happening with our youth. It was just a conversation; I wasn't interviewing him for a story. But when I asked him where the fathers are in these kids' lives, his answer went straight into my heart, with no need to take notes: "The men are hiding," he said ... I've received at least three copies of an email from CEA head Rashad Byrdsong that reads in part: "Now, more than ever, we need Black men to 'Man Up', 'Take Your Place' and begin to address this issue of black on black violence in our community. There needs to be a collective strategy and purpose on how best to engage black youth and men who continue to perpetuate genocide against one another.

Instead of answering all of my questions, however, this research has only led to more questions. For example, when I've heard the phrase "man up" used by white twenty-somethings it has sounded more like the "be a man," of my childhood and somewhat like the definitions provided on Urban Dictionary. The book and the post in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, however, seem to use the phrase as a rallying point for black men, a different context and usage. Perhaps that is where the phrase has its origins, within the black community, as it seems is so often the case with "slang" that becomes mainstream. Maybe readers could clarify this.

Keeping all of the definitions in mind, I began to think about the ways in which any of this relates to mediation. Undoubtedly, gender plays a big role in court-related disputes, particularly custody and visitation disputes. While many argue that the court system has caught up with the times and judges are no longer biased against men, others will argue equally hard that judges always favor women. There are "father's rights" attorneys who share this very perspective that women are always favored. Such attorneys offer fathers something that they argue will not be an inherent part of the process but instead is something for which an attorney must fight on behalf of a client. As a mediator, I'm going to choose to stay neutral on this part of the discussion. I bring it up, however, because it fits into a larger conversation about gender and its relationship to mediation.

The increasing popularity of the phrase "man up" raises some questions of which mediators should be aware. There seems to be a blurry line between "man up" as a plea for one --usually a man -- to take ownership or responsibility for his actions or the actions of his community, versus the expectation of a man to be without feelings of fear or self-doubt (anger is okay) and/or to preserve his position at all costs.

What expectations or bias will the female disputant have within the context of the mediation process and how do we balance that during the course of the mediation? That is, what if the mother keeps throwing things out there like: "I carried this baby for 9 months and you didn't" or "A child needs to be with his mom." How do we as mediators create the space for other perceptions without appearing biased toward one party or the other? What if a father believes that if he doesn't fight for exactly 50% of the time with his child then he is not being man enough? Do we as mediators need to address gender perceptions that enter the room not just by remaining neutral ourselves, but also by somehow contexualizing the clients' experiences and assumptions? If so, how do we do that without appearing as though we are taking sides? How do we do it without actually taking sides?

Given that mediators ourselves are human, and that we don't live in a vacuum, we need to understand the foundation for our own perceptions so that we may be aware of where we sit in this continuum of expectation regarding male behavior. We need to understand this in order to better understand our clients. Do we expect men to "brave it" and "be daring" at all times? Do we believe men should always be "strong" and "in control?" Whether we are conscious of it or not, the way in which we were raised and the relationships we have with both men and women, inform our perceptions and expectations. If a man cries during a mediation session, will a female mediator have to respond differently than would a male mediator in order to keep from appearing biased? How might that inform the experience for both parties?

The main idea that resonates for me in considering the phrase "man up" is that more than anything it is a reminder. It reminds me that I grew up at a time when boys -- not just men -- were told to "be a man" and perhaps that was positive at times and perhaps at times it was harmful. It's a reminder that things haven't changed a whole lot. Also, probably most importantly, it reminds me that whatever exists out in the world always enters the mediation room in some form or other. Understanding "man up" seems essential to fully comprehending, challenging, and balancing expectations of men, particularly when it comes to parenting disputes.

"Digital image content © 1997-2007 Hemera Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Jupiter Images Corporation. All Rights Reserved".

Ignoring Expectations and Limitations in Relationships: The Sleeping Bear Dunes Metaphor

Sleeping Bear Dunes in Michigan is a pretty amazing destination. I haven't been there in a while, but I got to thinking about it again. I found myself walking down a long flight of steps to the lake during yesterday's particularly balmy January weather. After about an hour of observing the water, clouds, and sand crashing and whistling against one another, with a storm just on the horizon, I finally made the trek back up those stairs to the street. Going down had been easy. It's going up that made me sweat. This reminded me of Sleeping Bear Dunes.

When I went with my partner to Sleeping Bear Dunes over 3 years ago we drove and then hiked a short way on a relatively flat trail to find ourselves at the top of a dune with a magnificent view of the lake. I can't recall the exact trail* or the location, but it was stunning and we were up rather high. We didn't notice it at first but after some time had passed and the sky had begun to darken, we walked further across the top of the dune and could see it in its entirety from another angle. It was then that we realized people had climbed down the steep dune to the lake, and many were now struggling to get back up. People were at various stages of climbing, some sitting in exhaustion very close to the top, some kicking with all their might at the bottom, slowing there pace as their struggle upward made almost no progress. We were a distance away from them, comfortably standing at the top of the dune, the light slowly fading, and it appeared as though there were people of all ages and physical conditions attempting to climb back up. No one at this point was climbing down.

We stood there for a long time, fascinated. What would happen if they didn't get to the top before the sun completely disappeared? There was only one way out unaided, and that was to climb back up the dune. The only other way out, I overheard someone saying, was to be rescued by boat, something that would cost the stranded hiker or hikers a significant amount of money.

I thought about the joy they must have felt running, rolling and sliding down that dune to the lake. How wonderful and freeing. How very much like falling in love. And like falling in love, once the falling part was over suddenly, it all just got harder. They couldn't stay at that fallen place. It was not a destination point. Yet I would bet that none of them thought that the hike back to the top would be that challenging or considered how long it might take to get back up (hours for most folks, I was told). Few, if any, had probably trained for it. Most probably expected that it wouldn't be that hard. They merely fell, and enjoyed the quick fall, until they stopped, looked back, and discovered there was a mountain suddenly between them and living. They had to climb up that dune or pay the price for a rescue.

Often when meeting with clients in mediation it becomes immediately clear that they met, fell in love, got married or moved in together, all very quickly, and were surprised to find themselves in my office, discussing the dissolution of the relationship. I often ask clients if they ever discussed the expectations they had for their lives together both as an individual and as part of a couple prior to making a commitment to be together forever. The answer is always no. It just happened, they tell me. They fell in love. They decided to be together. They thought they were on the same page about things. They weren't. Assumptions were made. Then they dug their feet further and further into the sand, neither of them making any progress upward.

Of course the relationship didn't work, I tell them. Even the kindest, most thoughtful, smartest people in the world cannot be successful in anything involving another person without first being honest about one's own limitations, the limitations of the other person, and the expectations both individuals have of each other. At the very least, even if a couple fails to communicate honestly about this at the beginning of their relationship, it has to happen somewhere along the way and adjustments have to be made accordingly. It's fun to slide down a sand dune, but if your calves aren't strong enough to get you back to the top, what do you really think is going to happen?

Falling is easy. It's also quick. It's in the climbing that we struggle and grow (or we pay lots of money to a mediator, attorney, or other professional to get us out of this sandy mess, to whisk us away in a boated rescue).

*The trail I'm referring to should not be confused with the "Dune Climb." In that climb the parking lot is situated at the bottom of the dune so the hike up is first and coming down returns one to one's car. The hike I'm describing was the opposite of that where the cars/parking were at the top of the dune with a trail along the top. For those who decided to go down the dune, there was no way to get back to your car (or to civilization) except to climb back up to the top.

Digital Image content © 2007-2008 Laura L. Noah. All Rights Reserved.

Britney Mania: Let's Stop Pretending It's About the Kids

I've never paid much attention to Britney Spears. It's been virtually impossible not to know about her recent deterioration, however, upon which the media so gleefully reports. The questions and statements are made: "What's led to Britney's strange behavior?" "Will she lose custody of her kids?"

Mostly I've ignored the hype. To me, she's a kid in trouble struggling with raising kids of her own. To the media, she's gossip, a way to make a buck or two, or more simply put: "entertainment." Today things have been taken to a whole other level and I just can't ignore it anymore because, well, kids are seriously being harmed. Since turning on the news at 5PM I've seen reporting that has been virtually non-stop Britney. Sorry, Barack, but your Iowa caucus success has just been bumped.

If you don't know why there's been so much focus on Britney today, then just turn on the TV or Google her name. You'll get more than enough information as to what happened last night, something to which I do not want to contribute.

What I will contribute is this: stop the Britney madness people ("people" meaning "the media" and all those consuming what is being spewed)! At the very least please understand the seriously negative impact this sort of press is having on our children ("our" meaning children being raised in the United States). Britney may be in emotional trouble. She may have a substance abuse problem. To me it is a chicken and egg question. Is the media merely reporting on her problem, or is the media contributing to it?

I strongly believe that children benefit from having a relationship with both of their parents with the exception of those parents who have physically, sexually, and/or emotionally harmed them. "Emotional abuse" is one of those challenging and subjective concepts parents use when they're angry at each other and they're slinging dirt in both directions. I believe it also actually exists at times but I'm not going to get into that right now. At any rate, in my admittedly limited observations, I have seen no indication that Britney has been abusive to her children in any of the aforementioned ways. Yet her ex, Federline, and his attorneys recently filed to keep Britney from having ANY contact with her children.

Yes, she has made stupid decisions. It appears as though she may need professional help of some kind. Yet threaten to take children away from almost any parent (male or female) and watch the sparks fly. What's going on with her strange behavior? Need that question seriously be asked?

Federline might be a better parent. So be it. I don't know. It's not for me to decide. Yet better or worse, aren't both parents important? I do know this: the kids are losing, over and over again. When will parents get it? It's destructive conflict that destroys all of us in the end.

A custody battle is ugly. A custody battle being broadcast daily across every possible media outlet inflicts irreparable harm not only upon Britney's children, but upon every child over whom parents are fighting in court. Just stop! There are alternatives. Please just stop it already!