One is the Most Compassionate Number

There was a huge earthquake in Nepal. More than 2,100 people are dead. Two days ago they were alive. Today they are dead. Want to know what I did when I heard the news? Well, first I finished my coffee. Later I went running and got some lunch. I had a strong craving for ice cream that afternoon, so I went to the grocery store and bought some. I ate the ice cream while watching Doctor Who. I edited about seven pages of a paper. I changed back into my pajamas in the early afternoon. I finished up Monday's homework.

Want to know what I didn't do? I did not cry over the loss of more than 2,000 friends, parents, children, and siblings. I didn't think about all the people who are now homeless. I didn't make a donation to any relief efforts. I didn't spend time poring over news stories and researching ways that I could help.

Did your Saturday look similar to mine? It probably did. But why is that? Why can't we bring ourselves to care about 2,100 people? I like to think that I'm a fairly compassionate person. You're probably compassionate, too. You have at least one cause that you care for deeply, right? When a friend needs you, you're there immediately. Yet we don't react on behalf of 2,100 people.

The reason is because of that number: 2,100. It's called statistical numbing, and it's been engrained in the human brain for a very long time. We mentally brush aside large numbers. If you hear a story about a little girl whose life is in danger, you'll donate $11 to help her. If you hear about eight children whose lives are in danger, you'll donate $5. Mathematically, that makes absolutely no sense. Even I know that, and I'm bad at math. Logically, we should want to multiply that $11 by 8 when we hear about those kids. But maybe numbers just seem less human to us than stories.

So here's what we should do. Ignore the number. Pretend the number doesn't exist. Focus on the story. A seven year old child stands in the middle of a pile of rubble. It's dangerous for her to be there. She's surrounded by nails, splintered wood, broken glass. She's going to get hurt. You know she is. But there's no mother to take her away from this. Her mother is somewhere under that pile. And that child is sobbing. Where's Mommy? Who's going to take care of this baby now? Who's going to hold this little girl? Get that image in your head. Hold on to it. It's painful, but hold on to it. And only when it's fully taken root inside of you, multiply that child's mommy by 2,100.

Now do you want to do something? Me too. Most of us won't be able to do much to help, but we can support the relief efforts monetarily. Care.org is supporting Nepal right now. So are many others, but make sure you check out CharityNavigator.org to make sure you're donating to a legitimate nonprofit. And if you can only spare $5, then there's $5 more for rebuilding. Have nothing? Tweet a link to a nonprofit.

I believe that prayers are powerful, and if you do too, pray for those friends and siblings and parents.

Our brains want to get in the way of our compassion. We won't let our brains win.

I Am a Theatre Artist

I am a theatre artist. And I've noticed that in the past couple of years I've lost a lot of confidence. Now, I haven't lost any confidence that theatre is what I want to *do*, but I have lost confidence in the way that I *say* that to other people. I've actually started to dread the "What are you studying...and what do you want to do with that?" conversation, because so many years of fake smiles, so many years of "do you want to be a teacher, then?", so many exclamations of "but you're so quiet!", and so many jokes about becoming a waitress, majoring in hobbies, and hints that I'll change my mind or that I should get a degree in "something that I can use" have chipped away at my desire to talk about my career plans with people who aren't artists.

So, here is my real resolution for 2015. I will quit caring about other people's reactions. I will stop skirting around that conversation just to avoid judgement. I am a theatre artist. I am pursuing acting. Yes, acting. We can talk about why I think acting is important later, but for now, know that I am in fact pursuing it. I am not going to teach acting, not to high school students, not to college students, not to children. (Well, maybe as a volunteer thing at some point, but teaching theatre will not be my career.) I have utmost respect and admiration for theatre instructors and for teachers in general, and to treat their career choice as a consolation prize for people who didn't "make it" is an insult to a group of very hard-working and intelligent people who have earned their place in the academic field. I will not do theatre "on the side." I will not "keep it up as a hobby." I have wanted to make acting my job since I was fourteen, and that hasn't changed.

Will I fail? Maybe. It happens. Does that scare me to death? Duh. But I'd rather try and fail than fail by avoiding my desired career because it got difficult to talk about during Thanksgiving.

Ways to Know that You're Dating a Woman, Not a Girl

1) She's at least eighteen years old.

...


...


...


...That's basically it.

An Open Letter to the Girl Who Wrote "Nice Guy"

For context, read "An Open Letter to the Girl Who Let the Nice Guy Go" first, then read the rest of this post. The original post was first published in June of this year, but I only recently saw it on my facebook newsfeed. This is my reaction to the letter. 

__________

Dear Writer, 

I can see that your letter comes from a good place, that you are probably writing on behalf of your friends. You've probably seen some wonderful guys get ignored, and I can see that this frustrates you. As a woman, I too have experienced the frustration of being ignored. Perhaps you have too. I applaud you for questioning the minefield of dating, because it truly is a minefield, and trying to navigate it brings up all sorts of difficulties and heartbreaks. 

But now I have to address the sentiments of your letter that bothered me, the attitudes that are pervasive in our culture. These attitudes may spring from a place of good intentions, but ultimately they hurt women. Your open letter is full of genuine concern, but beneath the surface, some problematic outlooks lurk. 

First, you begin by lamenting the women who consistently date men who treat them like dirt. And then you said this: 

So you tried to push the nice guy away. When he wouldn't go away, you pushed harder. Still, he didn't give up and every time you pushed harder, he pulled you in even more. He ignored your fears and forced you to grow; He fought for your passions when you were too busy writing them off. He forgot your wants and focused on everything you needed. Then you walked away because he was too nice. 

This may come as a surprise, but she probably walked away for reasons other than him being "too nice." Let's talk about consent for a minute. We usually talk about consent in terms of sex, but no means no whether or not the situation involves sex. You're asking for a commitment that goes far beyond sex. The "nice guy" here wants an emotional commitment. He wants her heart, her time, her trust. He wants what she clearly isn't ready to give to him yet, and he's not respecting her "no." In fact, he's willing to "pull [her] in," "ignore [her] fears," "force [her] to grow." Words like pull, ignore, force, and forget your wants, should send up a giant, bright red flag. If we were discussing sex, it would. But we're discussing something even more important than sex. That's not to diminish the importance of sexual consent but to highlight the importance of emotional consent as well. Her mind, her heart, and her soul are all more important than her body, and the "nice guy" wants her to give all of those things to him on his own terms, not hers. The first paragraphs in your open letter reveal that this hypothetical woman has probably been hurt by the men in her life. And yet the "nice guy" thinks that she should be ready to date him because he's nice. It's not just about him. It's about her too, and whether or not she is ready to be in a relationship with him. He can't force an emotional bond with her. No does not mean please ignore what I want. No does not mean you know what I need better than I do. No not mean pull me in further when I push away. No does not mean maybe or keep asking or I'm playing hard to get. No means no. That's it. The end. 

"Wait," the nice guy may be thinking, "but why is she saying no to me but not the jerk?" Well, if somebody is hurting her, if he's abusive in any way, be that physically, emotionally, or sexually, then Nice Guy should do something about it. He should encourage her to get help. Call the authorities if she's unable to get help on her own. But he does not get to decide that a relationship with him is what she needs to heal. He may offer support, but he should not force her into a relationship. A "nice guy" coercing her into an emotional bond is the last thing she needs, especially if the aforementioned jerks have toyed with her emotions in the past. 

This letter assumes that women owe men. Hollywood has been perpetuating that idea for many years. But it's time that we call out these attitudes so that we can put a stop to them. 

Covenant House

"Oh please please please snow," I muttered while staring out the window. We'd had a light snowfall already, and it wasn't sticking, but because this is Texas I was holding on to hope that my classes might still be cancelled. It's the benefit of living in places like Texas and Tennessee. When you don't get much snow, the tiniest bit of it will shut everything down and give you a day to read books and watch Netflix. Or finish that paper on Russian theatre. I had the news turned on. They kept talking about the dropping temperatures, because again, we panic about that stuff over here. Nothing about school cancellations, though.

"Come on, snow!" I whispered. I was getting irritated. And then I looked at the TV, and I forgot about school for just a minute. On the screen, a group of women were setting up a table of hot food. The camera panned over to a group of homeless men. They lined the sidewalk, huddled up against a building, bundled into sleeping bags, hats, and earmuffs. It wasn't enough. How could it be enough? And then it struck me: I'm sitting here praying for the exact thing that can only make their lives worse right now. Suddenly avoiding my classes didn't seem so important.

I enjoy winter, but I realize that everything I love about winter involves avoiding it. I like the giant sweaters, the time spent in front of a fireplace, and wrapping up in a blanket while I enjoy the aforementioned books and Netflix. If I didn't have food, shelter, and heat, winter would be a nightmare.

And for many people under the age of twenty one, winter is a nightmare. Think of the last time you felt truly cold, when the wind crept under all the layers and cut into your skin, when you shivered violently as your body desperately tried to get warm again. That moment might have been this morning, but how long did it last? Long enough to get your car warmed up? Long enough for you to dig your keys out of your bag and get into your house? What if it didn't end? Can you imagine spending an entire night feeling that way? For homeless teens, these nights aren't just cold. They're dangerous.

That's why Covenant House, an organization supporting homeless teenagers, is so important. It's more than a shelter. Yes, it does provide shelter and warm beds, but it also provides job training, help for mothers, and so much more. I only found out about Covenant House a month or so ago, but it's clear that they provide a lifesaving work. And if you, like me, don't have a lot of extra cash lying around, there are ways you can help that won't cost you any money, although donations are always helpful as well. For now, why not take a look at the website and just get to know the organization a bit? It may inspire you to make a difference.

If We Treated Everybody the Way We Treat Artists

I am a theatre artist. I'm a theatre artist suffering from a huge case of Impostor Syndrome, but I am theatre artist. Recently I started wondering what it would sound like if we treated everybody the way we treat artists. All of the following are based on things that have been said to me or about me. 

• I want to be a high school teacher.
• Hey, you know what you could do? You could teach middle school! 
• Well yeah, if that's where the jobs are, but I really want to teach high school. 
• Or elementary school! 
• I'm not actually great with kids... 
• You can be a coach. 
• I'm not athletic. I just want to teach high school. 
• And that's it? 
• Yes. 
• Oh. 

• Look, you should at least minor in education. You can totally still do your business administration thing on the side. 

• Your work can't be that hard. You're a math major, right? 

• What's your major? 
• Engineering. 
• Oh, so you want to be a teacher?
• Actually, I want to be an engineer. 
• Really? 

• She got a degree in biology. I think she's going to get a Master's in something she can use. 

• Psychology is a hobby, not a career. 

• He's probably really full of himself. All architects are. 

• Are you still doing that dentistry thing?
• Yes. 
• What do you want to do with that? 
• Uh...dentistry. 
• Huh. You dating anyone yet? 
• Nope. Pass the mashed potatoes. 

And finally...

• I gave up sociology when I converted to Christianity. 

Why I'm (Still) Writing About Introversion

Last week I ran across this article several times on facebook, and you should totally read it. It's about some of the problems that extroverts face, and it has a lot of points that introverts may not have previously considered. For example, I hadn't realized that while I can't stand it when people assume that I'm sad all the time, many extroverts can't stand the pressure to act happy all the time. And the fact that many people perceive extroverts as shallow is really unfair. An extrovert can contemplate deep subjects. And I can look like I'm deep in thought while remembering that I'm out of shampoo. So yes, do read that article and others like it. If you don't know much about the extroverted personality, go ahead and do some research on it and its unique set of challenges. While you're at it, look up ambiversion too, because those guys aren't super represented right now. (Ambiverts fall somewhere in the middle of the introvert/extrovert spectrum.)

But I do have to admit that there was something about the piece that bothered me. Not the list itself. No, that list needs to be read, shared, and discussed. That list is important. But the opening paragraph made me feel uneasy.

Here it is:

Over the past few years I’ve noticed a growing number of articles exclaiming, “How To Take Care of An Introvert” or “10 Things Everyone Should Understand About Introverts” and while I have no real problem with introverts and introversion, my issue is with the fact that people of the internet seem to have romanticized introversion in a way that turns any possible social impediments a person might have into desirable quirky traits. Not only this, but extroverts are suddenly the bad guys for not understanding introverts or mistreating introverts, etc, etc. As a self-proclaimed extrovert, I’m pretty sick and tired of people assuming that introverts are the only people who have got it hard. Really, seriously? Are we really going to play this game? Now you look here, mister. Extroverts may not seem as delicate or may not seem as complex and diverse, but extroverts have a whole different category of BS they have to deal with too. It’s not easy out there for anyone.

And on facebook, I've seen a certain level of annoyance over the posts about introverts. Now perhaps I feel a little uneasy simply because I'm one of the ones writing those posts. But I honestly think it goes deeper than that. 

Specifically, the part that claims that we have "romanticized" introversion and the part that equates my personality with "possible social impediments" really bother me. Introversion isn't about social impediments, and this paragraph reveals that our culture still doesn't quite understand what introversion is. (Introverts are people who have the most energy when they are by themselves or in small groups. Extroverts are people who have the most energy when they are with larger groups.) 

So yes, we do talk about introversion a lot. I talk about introversion a lot. But because of all of the annoyance and irritation over these posts that I have seen others express, I thought that I might take a moment to explain myself. 

____________________

Please understand that I'm not saying that extroverts shouldn't write these posts, that they shouldn't express examples of their own difficulties. On the contrary. I ask that you please keep writing them, because honestly, as an introvert, I may not always understand some misconceptions that you continue to face. I am, however, going to address the sentiment of annoyance and (occasionally) outright hostility that I've seen against all the posts about introversion, and I do want to explain why we are still, after all of this time, writing about it. 

____________________

So why do introverts suddenly have such a big voice on the internet? Why are we still talking about it? 

I'm not sure how exactly this whole thing got started, but I think we can at least partly thank/blame Susan Cain for this. She wrote a really fantastic book called Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking. And while a few other authors have written about the subject (I have a stack of those books on my shelf right now), Susan Cain's book gained a significant amount of popularity. And as a result, introverts have taken on a new level of interest in their own personalities and have exhibited a desire to talk about it more publicly than they have in the past. 

Now, while I do have to acknowledge that extroverts can be pretty fantastic ("No, you don't get it. Some of my best friends are extroverts, okay?"), and I absolutely understand that each personality type has its own list of difficulties, I'm not going to stop writing about introversion.  

Because while extroverts do have struggles, the fact is that extroversion is seen as normal. It's seen a sign of mental health while its opposite is seen as a sign of neuroticism (See the OCEAN personality test). I'm not exaggerating, either. Introversion was literally almost included in the DSM as a sign of a mental disorder. A mental disorder. This was in 2010, by the way. We define introversion by its lack of extroverted traits and not the other way around.  We assume that extroverts make better leaders than introverts. Extroversion is the default. Any deviation from the default is odd. Introversion is often seen as a defect. Introverts are told, sometimes even directly, that they must change their personalities. 

Lexus thinks that introversion is a pathology that needs a cure. 

And sometimes people of faith assume that God Himself is an extrovert. From this sermon about Christmas.

According to Richard Haverson, just by virtue of my being introvert, I am a failure as a Christian. How do you think this makes me feel?

Speaking of faith and introversion, the aforementioned book by Susan Cain points out that there is an extroverted bias in evangelical Christianity. She quotes a certain evangelical requirement for church leadership:

Like HBS, evangelical churches often make extroversion a prerequisite for leadership, sometimes explicitly. "The priest must be...an extrovert who enthusiastically engages members and newcomers, a team player," reads an ad for a position as an associate rector of a 1,400-member parish. A senior priest at another church confesses online that he has advised parishes recruiting a new rector to ask what his or her Myers-Briggs score is. "If the first letter isn't an E [for extrovert]," he tells them, "think twice...I'm sure our Lord was [an extrovert]." 

Wait, how is that okay? Why do these particular Christians think that it's perfectly fine to discriminate in such a way against introverts? How do you think people would have reacted if they had advertised for the opposite?

This whole "introversion as an illness" trope exists everywhere.  Even Google defines introversion as "a shy, reticent person" when in fact, one can be an outgoing introvert. My psychology textbook in college went so far as to claim that introverts don't like fun. My psychology. Textbook. As in a vetted academic text that was edited several times before publication. That is not okay. Sigmund Freud himself decided that introversion is a prelude to narcissism. He thought that introversion was the result of sexual repression because he's Freud and so of course he did. And this nonsense is everywhere. 

The structure of American offices? Built for extroverts.
Our entire educational system? Built for extroverts.
Television? Idealizes the extrovert personality.
The job market? Favors extroverts.

So take just a minute to step into an introvert's shoes. You have been told (sometimes literally) throughout your entire life that you will be a better person if you just acted more extroverted. You have been seen as a project or a trophy. Your personality, part of the very essence of who you are, has been de-emphasized and sometimes demonized. Psychology textbooks and dictionaries have said that there is something wrong with you. You live in a world that just is not built for you. You've been made to feel that you are not normal. You have been called selfish for turning down social engagements because you needed time to recharge.

And then somebody writes a book that makes you sigh in relief. Somebody else publishes an article that expresses everything you've been going through for years. Suddenly, you realize that you are, in fact, normal. You see that you are not strange and that at least a third of the population is experiencing the same thing that you are. You can talk to other people about this! Not only are you allowed to acknowledge that your personality is not a defect, you are now even allowed to like your personality. You have the chance to actually celebrate the parts of you that people have tried to make you hide for so long. Wouldn't you hold on to that chance for dear life? Wouldn't you relish that newfound freedom? Wouldn't you celebrate?

I'm going to give a somewhat clumsy comparison. When I was in eighth grade I realized that all of the other girls my age were straightening their hair. Straight hair was the norm. Curls and waves had to be dealt with and taken away. In college I decided that I actually liked my curls and that I wasn't going to straighten them anymore. Does that mean that I have some sort of bias against straight hair? Of course not! It just means that I appreciated this aspect of myself. That's all. It's also like when I say that I'm proud to be a woman. Does that mean I have something against men? Nope.

When we write posts about introverts and introversion, when we dedicate pinterest boards to the subject, when we talk about it on tumblr or share it on facebook, we are not trying to attack extroverts, claim superiority, or say that introverts are the only ones with problems. No, we are just trying to celebrate our newfound freedom to be proud of or even okay with our own personalities. It's a freedom that we didn't have for a very, very long time. 

So, to my dear extroverts and ambiverts: I'm listening. I want to know what you are going through. I want to hear about the biases that have been used against you. I want to understand the times when people have given you problems because of your personalities. Please tell me. Blog about it. Tweet about it. Share it on facebook. Talk to me about it face to face. Understand that I appreciate you for exactly who you are. But please, please try to understand why I have to keep writing about introversion as well.

Likewise, the extroverts in my life 

have significantly contribute to my healing...

Extroverts who have learned how to gently 

draw out the opinions of introverts 

and who give us the space to think quietly

are truly God's grace to us. 

-Adam S. McHugh-  

Даунсайд Ап (Downside Up)!

Before you do anything else, watch this video:

It's a vicious, disgusting cycle: Lock up children with disabilities, deprive them of nutrition and human interaction, watch them become unresponsive due to your actions, conclude that all disabled children will become the same way based on your observations. Repeat. It's horrifying. Of course kids turn into what you call "vegetables" when you don't treat them like humans. Of course they regress when they stay in a crib for eighteen years. Did you stop to think that their problems don't come from their disabilities but from the fact that you locked them up, starved them, and abused them? No?

Imagine that you are a new parent. The doctor tells you that the child you've just given birth to will be a drain to your family, that she will never be able to learn anything, she will never be a successful adult. You will never be able to take proper care of her, the doctor says. The state institutions, on the other hand, can take care of her. They have the equipment and the skills that these problem children need. Plus, society won't ever accept your child, so it's best that she's hidden away.

Of course, none of the above is true, but how exactly were you supposed to know that? You've never talked to somebody with Down Syndrome, and besides, the doctor is the expert. He should know best. And he won't stop pressuring you. So finally, reluctantly, you sign the forms. You leave the hospital, and the baby stays behind. The doctor has assured you that you can try again.

____________________

Today in Russia, 85% of babies with Down Syndrome are given up to state "care". This has to stop. It has to end now. And the people of Downside Up are working hard to make that happen. Downside Up is a nonprofit organization in Russia. It provides support and education to parents of children with Down Syndrome. It has an Early Intervention Center in Moscow that provides resources, school, and therapy. Most importantly, it changes society's incorrect views of people with Down Syndrome and decreases the number of children abandoned in orphanages. Check out that link above or like them on facebook to show your support and see other ways that you can help. 

Lumos

If you're a fan of Harry Potter, you recognized the title of this post immediately. In Harry Potter's world, lumos is a spell. But in the muggle world, lumos is much more powerful.

As I advocate for specific children to be adopted, I also want to devote time to organizations that keep kids from being institutionalized in the first place. J.K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter novels, founded one such organization. This organization is called Lumos. 

The problem with keeping children out of orphanages, as I've pointed out before, is that it's not a matter of addressing one issue. It's a multifaceted problem. The death of a parent isn't the only thing that will turn a child into an "orphan". Sometimes poverty will put a child in an institution. Often, when a child is born with special needs, the doctors will encourage (read: pressure, almost force) the child's parents to give up the new baby. The parents are told that the child won't amount to anything in society and is better off hidden away. Discrimination against the Roma has led to a high amount of Roma children in orphanages. Where does one even begin to solve this problem?

Lumos is a really good place to start. It's focus is Eastern Europe, and it works to undo the oppressive systems that lock children up. From education about disabilities to fighting neglect and abuse, Lumos fights for a world in which these harmful institutions don't exist. Click here to visit the website and see some of the work that this organization does to protect children.

For All the Starfish

Do you know the starfish story? Chances are that some relative forwarded it to you in an email sometime around 2005. That's why I know about the starfish story. It's also why, on principle, I shook my head and ignored it. I never forwarded anything, and I don't repost on facebook. Jesus still loves me. I still love Jesus. It's all good.

The story, on the rare chance that you haven't heard it, tells us about starfish that have washed up on the beach. These starfish are going to die if somebody doesn't put them back into the water, so a child starts walking along the shore, tossing the starfish into the waves. "What are you doing?" Asks a cynical man. "Throwing starfish in the water," responds the child. The cynic reminds the child that s/he can't possibly make a difference because there are thousands of starfish washed up along miles and miles of beach. The child picks up another starfish, tosses it into the waves, looks back at the man, and says "It made a difference to that one." Again, I ignored this story until I started working with my own starfish. 

I've been feeling really overwhelmed over the past couple of days. Every time a child gets a family, I am over the moon excited about it. But for every child who learns that they really are loved, there are millions more who never will. Children in the US and in countries all over the world will age out without ever being adopted. Right now, young boys are turning to crime because it is literally their only option for survival. Teenaged girls are being sold for sex, either because they were kidnapped or they were lied to and promised real jobs. Children are committing suicide. And usually, when I get overwhelmed over the statistics, one of the only things that helps me keep going is to think about specific children who used to be orphans and remember that it made a difference to that one. 

But right now, as I'm walking along this shore line and tossing individual starfish into the water, I wonder if there is a way to keep them from washing up onto the sand in the first place. Of course, somebody has to fight for the starfish that are already on the shore. But if there is a way to prevent that kind of pain in the future, I want to know about it.

Which is why I started asking around and doing my research. As it turns out, there are many, many ways to help keep children out of orphanages. We need a multi-faceted approach, focusing on alleviating poverty, providing education about special needs, ending discrimination, and several other things. A fair amount of organizations exist to address these issues. So I'm going to keep posting about my individual starfish, but I'm also going to start highlighting ways that we can help prevent children from becoming orphans.

Keep an eye out for these posts in the near future, share them so that others know how to help, and ask me if you want more information about helping the starfish. 

I Am Not Your Project

"I am so glad," I've heard more than one friend say, "that I got you to come out of your shell." 

That bothers me. It really does. Maybe you think it shouldn't because if I'm out of my "shell", that's obviously a good thing, right? Well, yes...sort of. 

If you draw energy from being around other people, then you may not realize that your quiet friends think of this "shell" you refer to differently than you think of it. When well-meaning people tell me to come out of my shell, they're thinking that I'm using it out of fear, that I need a place to hide from the scary world, that I'm shy, that this shell is oppressing me and I would abandon it forever if only one of my more talkative friends would just save me from it once and for all. 

But that's not it. In reality, the "shell" you think of is just a place for me to regain energy when I'm drained. It's just me speaking softly while we gain each other's trust. That's all. 

And for that matter, I was going to come out of my shell with or without your help. Now, don't take that the wrong way. Your friendship is still very important to me. If you are my friend, I treasure you, and just as you will likely need my help at some point, I will also need yours. But I don't need rescue from my own personality. I don't need you to make me more extroverted. But maybe that's what it looked like on the surface. At the beginning of our friendship, maybe I was quieter than most. Over the course of getting to know you, I probably didn't share too much. And then suddenly there was a breakthrough. I started talking more. I started sharing more personal things. I became louder. I felt like part of the group and joined in the silliness...

...and that was going to happen no matter who was there. I don't come out of my shell because you decided that you were going to make me do it. I came out of my shell because I got used to the situation. And that was bound to happen at one point or another. And it'll happen again. I'll be in a completely different group of people, and the whole cycle will repeat itself. And there's not a thing wrong with that. So perhaps it ins't the emphasis on coming out of my shell that really bothers me. It irks me a little bit when people bring it up, but maybe that has more to do with the face that it's a cliche. No, where it gets really problematic is when you bring the I into it. I brought you out of your shell. Of course, if you see me hovering awkwardly at the edges of a party and you do walk up to talk to me, I will appreciate that immensely. If you take the time to get to know me, you'll have a lifelong friend. But do not under any circumstances whatsoever pick the quiet kid out from the rest of the crowd and think, "I am going to get that person to come out of her shell." Once you've done that, you've stopped seeing me as a person. You're looking at me as a project, so that when I do, as I always will, come out of my shell, you will see that as your personal victory. I am not interested in being your project. I am interested in being your friend. My personality is not your prize. 

Burn Relief for Alisha

Meet Alisha.  Sheis 7 years old and lives in Pakistan.  God created this child, loves this child, and has placed her in our path.  She lost her mother at the age of only 3.  She was accidentally burned over much of her body by a pot of boiling tea.  

In Pakistan, the government hospitals are not equipped to deal with such a severe case.  They have no medicine or help for her.  She was taken to the private hospital and was told that they can help, but that the money for treatment must be brought first.  This happens all over the world.  Can you imagine?  No medication?  No pain help?  What if this where your child?  It's almost unbearable to even imagine.

The cost to treat her is $297. I know that we can do this.  That we can reach out across the ocean and spare this child from the pain she is enduring. Alisha needs to know that God has not forgotten her.  It's up to you and me to be HIS hands and feet and minister to the orphan, the hurting, the needy..and she is all of these.  

Any amount welcome.  I had to include a little more in the request to afford the transfer fees and the fees of gofundme and paypal.  

Thank you!

Jenn Anderson
Hands of Action International

______________________

Here is the link to Jenn's GoFundMe page for Alisha. Thank you! 

The F Word: On Faith, Voting, and Pants

I didn't really understand that the F word was "bad" until age fourteen or so, mostly because I grew up around people who never said it. Sometime around ninth grade though, they finally explained why it was wrong.

I am, of course, referring to the word feminism. 

And I'm not joking about being taught that feminism is wrong. This wasn't some implied code of conduct or an unspoken sentiment. I mean that when I was in high school, we were literally taught how to argue against feminism. In college I heard dear female friends say "I am not a feminist!" lest their character be questioned. 

So now I've divided my readers into two camps. On the first side, we have the feminists, some of whom are Christians. (I'm a Christian feminist, by the way.) And they're horrified. They're imagining a situation in which teenagers are taught that women shouldn't vote and shouldn't have equal pay. (We're nowhere near finished fighting for that last one, either.) On the second side, we have a group comprised entirely (probably) of religious people. And they're horrified. I've just announced that I am a Christian feminist, and in many minds, those two words should never be put together. If they haven't clicked away from this post already, they're bracing themselves for an attack on their beliefs. They're cringing in anticipation of the moment when I'll inevitably bring out the misandry and the arguments that women should dominate men. 

And that is the problem that happens nearly every time church people talk about feminism. We're arguing about two different things. 

_______________

Feminism, at it's core, is simply the belief that men and women are equals. It acknowledges that globally, men tend to enjoy more rights and privileges than women do, and it seeks to change that. Sounds reasonable, right? So where did we get our signals crossed? 

Well, we tripped over some of the different branches of feminism. Just like almost anything else, feminism has a whole list of different types. A google search on feminism will lead you through a labyrinth of quotes and definitions. Type "feminism is" into the search bar, and suggestions will include "feminism is for everybody" as well as "feminism is a hate movement". Cheris Kramarae believes that "feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings", while Pat Robertson believes that it's "about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians". Yes, that is very specific, and no, I didn't make that up. 

Generally speaking, when I talk about being a feminist, I'm referring to the main feminist movement. It's sometimes called "liberal feminism", though the definition of "liberal" here isn't usually about politics, so if that word bothers you, you can pretend it isn't there. This is usually what people mean when they talk about feminism. It isn't about misandry. Women, do you enjoy your right to vote? Drive a car? Own property? Do you like wearing pants? Well, you can thank God for feminism. Are you concerned about eliminating rape? Violence against women? Female infanticide? Trafficking? Then feminism is your friend. Men, do you believe that women are human beings who are just as important as you are? If so, then believe it or not, you are a feminist. 

Now, I'm willing to bet that many, if not the vast majority, of the "feminism is bad!" camp would actually celebrate a closer look into all of the things that I've listed above. I'm making this assumption based on the fact that my high school, the same school that taught against feminism, also taught that voting is important for men and women. Plus, we all wore jeans. 

Again, we just got tangled up in all the different branches. You see, in addition to your ordinary, run-of-the-mill, "women are people and not property" feminism, you also have subcategories such as cultural feminism, radical feminism, socialist feminism, etc... Each of these categories examines how feminism works in different aspects of society. Confusion happens when a proponent of one branch doesn't specify which branch he or she is talking about. If you hear somebody say "I believe in socialism because I'm a feminist", you might conclude that mainstream feminism is all about socialism. In reality, the person you heard is a socialist feminist, and you will probably go on to meet other feminists with very different beliefs. Have you ever heard somebody use the words "introverted" and "shy" interchangeably? It's a similar type of mislabeling (and one that also seriously gets on my nerves). Though some introverts may be shy, shyness is not the same thing as introversion. In the same way, though some feminists may follow socialist (or cultural, or radical, etc.) feminism, those things are not the definition of feminism as a whole. 

Do you see now how we're talking about two different things? 

____________________

I'm going to end this post with a these two messages.  

To those of you who readily identify as feminists, whether you're religious or not: Be gentle with those who recoil at the word feminist. These people aren't arguing against a woman's right to freedom and equal pay. They're usually just misinformed about what feminism means. Keep that in mind, and then explain your thoughts calmly and carefully. Really listen to what other people have to say. Chances are that you'll reveal where our wires got crossed, and you may help others understand why feminism is important. It may take persistence. Just be patient. 

To the Christians who have negative feelings about feminism: Be gentle with those of us who call ourselves feminists. We aren't arguing for misandry or trying to say that all men are the same. We usually just want a world where it's safe to be a woman. Take some time to research and allow the stereotypes to leave your mind. Always explain yourselves calmly and carefully, and really listen to what other people have to say. 

To the Christians who work on feminism within the Church, to those who try hard to undo the subtle sexism that happens inside and outside our religious setting, to those who are caught up in the "complementarian" vs "egalitarian" debates, and to those who want to see more female leadership in the church: keep going. I'm fighting alongside you. 

____________________

For further reading and research on Christian feminism, I recommend a book called Jesus Feminist by Sarah Bessey. It often reads like poetry and serves as a good introduction not only to ways we can be feminist and Christian but also why we can be feminist because of our faith. I also highly recommend A Year of Biblical Womanhood by Rachel Held Evans. It will truly make you think. When you have to put a book down every once in a while to turn a sentence over in your mind a few times, you know you've got a good read. (And for an interesting, if infuriating, study on how people misunderstand feminism, research why LifeWay Christian stores don't carry either of those titles.) 

Those are the books on the subject that I've read so far, and I've got plenty more on my to-read list. If you want to recommend a book to me, I'd love to hear about it! 

By the way, did you know that some medieval men were so upset by the idea of a female apostle that they changed a female name in the Bible to a male one? For more information on that as well as insights on women in the church, check out the Junia Project. 

Remember That One Time?

Hey, remember that one time when a bunch of Christians flooded the nation's Chik-fil-A restaurants because we were going to stick it to the world with chicken sandwiches? Yeah. Good times. High fives all around, everybody.

What about that other time when we decided that we needed our own dating site? Eh, I guess that one's not so weird. We have dating sites for every demographic, including geeks, farmers, and pretty people (or narcissists). I didn't make that up. Okay, so while I do have a problem with a "find God's match for you" tagline, I guess there's nothing wrong with a Christian dating site. What about Christian Pinterest though? Christian Youtube? It's not just an internet thing, either. We've got our very own breath mints. I mean, maybe there's not technically anything wrong with those things, but...but...did we actually need any of it? If I eat Christian candy, will my breath smell holier than if I'd eaten one of those secular candies?

My personal favorite is that one time we decided to stop writing letters and sending funds to real, actual children when a ministry decided to hire gay people. Good choices.




Hey, remember that one time when we all stopped shopping from the company that says "Merry Christmas" but doesn't pay women as much as men?

Remember that one time when we wrote to the clothing store that sells "modest" things but exploits needy children and single mothers overseas?

Remember that one time when we took to social media to voice our anger over poverty, hunger, and rape?

Remember that one time we forwarded emails full of ways we could help orphans?

Remember that one time when we held a massive protest against abusers and abusive systems?




...I don't remember those last ones, either.

"Modest is Hottest" - Let's put that phrase to rest

"'Modest is hottest' is the stupidest phrase ever, guys," I posted on twitter.  "Quit it." 

____________________

One of the stories on Good Morning America today featured a father who wanted to teach his teenaged daughter a lesson.  The daughter had evidently taken to wearing short shorts, so her dad decided that he would go out in public wearing a pair of Daisy Dukes himself.  It worked.  And I won't lie, I thought the story was hilarious. At the end of the segment, the father gave his personal motto: "Modest is hottest."

"'Modest is hottest,'" one of the anchors repeated.  "I like that.  I may have to steal that." They talked about the phrase as if it were something new.  It's not.  Christians have been using that phrase for years. I heard it in church groups from sixth grade up until I moved away. I heard it from my classmates in college. Actually, most of the people I've heard say "modest is hottest" are people I respect and admire. As finals week began this past school year, I received an email that went like this:

Ladies ~

Although it is getting warmer outside – “modesty” is still the “cool” way to dress. Please maintain consideration for male faculty and classmates and keep your clothing appropriate during the next week with finals.

No, it wasn't a joke.  My RD sent that email.  Last time I checked, an RD is responsible for things like funneling maintenance requests to the right people, hosting res hall meetings, making sure the residents don't destroy the apartments, and other such things.  I really don't believe that the phrase "keep tabs on the clothing habits of your residents" appears anywhere in the job description of a Resident Director.

"But isn't that good advice?" You may be thinking.  "Shouldn't we try to dress modestly?" Well, yes, it is good advice.  To a certain extent.  There are several reasons why I can't stand that "modest is hottest" phrase, though, and I mentioned it on twitter this morning after seeing the GMA story.  I'm sure the sentiment seemed strange coming from me.  I'm very careful about the way I dress on a daily basis, to the point where I'm about two steps away from dressing like a nun and my own mother has told me to lighten up.  Two of my friends asked me what I meant when I said that I don't like the phrase.  I started to respond before realizing that I have a lot of things to say about the topic.  It would take too long to type out on a phone.  I waited until I had time to sit down at a computer, and I figured that if I was going to take the time to work on a response I might as well use my blog.  So here I am.

The first question I got was this: "Do you mean the concept or the phrase itself?" The answer is both. Let's take a minute to talk about each one.

The Phrase Itself 

1) It makes us sound ridiculous. 

I have a tendency to think about words and word choices a lot, which is part of the reason why "modest is hottest" sounds silly to me.  Generally, if we're talking about appearances, the word "hot" is used to mean "sexual".  The whole point of the modesty movement among Christians is to save our sexuality for appropriate contexts, right?  That's why we're advocating modesty here, and that's why it seems like good advice.  It doesn't make sense to me, then, that we'd describe modesty as "hot" in the first place. It's basically saying that "modesty is the most sexual", which probably wasn't the point that this phrase was meant to make.  Am I over thinking?  Well, yes, it's what I do.  Still, the fact remains that we've made a phrase mean the exact opposite of what it says just because we like our platitudes to rhyme or sound catchy.  Which brings me to the next point: 

2) You can't solve the world's problems with one-liners. 

You know, church signs are great.  They serve a nice purpose when the words on them wish us a happy Easter or tell us what time the service starts.  But then you'll have those signs.  The ones that stand there, out in the open for the whole world to see, thinking that they're clever but failing dismally. You've seen them.  

• "Prevent truth decay," one said, because apparently evangelism uses puns now. 

• "We're not only Christians, but we are Christians only," said another that wasn't too concerned about being welcoming.  

• "Who will play for Coach Jesus?" Said a nice guilt-inducer during football season. 

• "50 Shades of Grace" says one that's trying too hard to be relevant. 

• "IPod? IPad? Try iPray...God is listening!" Says a...ugh.  I can't.  I just can't.  Who thought that this was a good idea? 

Those first three are examples of church signs that I've driven past.  The last two come from a website that provides suggestions for what to put on church signs.  Yes, I am absolutely serious about that last statement.  

Here's the point: did any of those statements change your life in any way? Did any of them truly make you think?  No? Exactly.  Once, in a history class, my professor mention something about depression.  I don't remember what the context was.  What I do remember is that one kid who shouted "We live in a Prozac nation!" The end.  No follow-up.  This kid might have sparked a discussion, given examples, talked about why so many people suffer from depression or why he thinks anti-depressants are over-prescribed in this country.  But no.  Instead, he gave us a one-liner: a simple, catchy, quick moralistic statement that managed to isolate people who actually do suffer from depression.  One-liners don't work.  They're often made with good intentions, but they don't encourage conversation.  They don't open up pathways to problem-solving.  They are smug by nature. They are a simple declaration of "I am right, here is a clever statement to prove it, and that's the end of that." 

That's exactly what "modest is hottest" is.  It's a one-liner attempting to summarize an entire belief.  It just won't work. 

The Concept 

1) It shames women.  This is perhaps the saddest thing about the origin of the phrase "modest is hottest", because I know that the intention is the exact opposite of shame.  I can't speak for everyone who uses the phrase, but the people I know who say it mean to communicate love.  The intended message is simple: "You are important.  You are worth so much more than your sexuality alone. Please don't put so much focus on your sexuality.  Allow people the chance to notice your spirit and personality." I get that.  I applaud that message.  But the "modest is hottest" movement has warped the original intent and turned it into a device for shame.  Have you noticed, for example, that we only speak about modesty to women and girls? Men rarely, if ever, have to listen to lectures about how to dress appropriately to avoid "tempting others".  Do you think that the RDs for the male res halls sent out any emails like the one copied above?  I'd be willing to bet money that they didn't.  Recently, a blog post titled "FYI (if you're a teenage girl)" gained popularity.  The post was written by a mom of teenaged sons, a mom who very clearly cares about her kids and has taken the admirable step of being proactive in monitoring what they see online.  The post gets problematic for me when she talks about her "no second chance" policy.  If a girl posts an immodest picture, she's kicked off the boys' friend list and will not be re-added.  And that's it.  If those girls read this post, they can see in no uncertain terms that they have done something bad, they should be ashamed, and that they have no way to make up for it. Originally, this post also showed photos of these teenaged boys in their swim trunks, posing at the beach.  The blogger made the wise decision to replace those photos with other ones, but think about this: why is it okay for men to pose in swimsuits, and why is it not okay for women?  And by the way, I'm not advocating for anybody, male or female, to dress scantily in public.  I definitely believe in the importance of dressing appropriately. I'm just pointing out that there is a double standard here.  When women see the Christian community advocating this kind of modesty for women but not for men, we begin to think that there is something inherently more evil, more scandalous, about ourselves that we need hide. Ultimately, what women hear from "modest is hottest" is not "you are loved" but "your body is shameful, cover yourself up".  

Here's where this gets even more problematic. The attitude behind the phrase encourages rape culture. Oh, it's absolutely unintentional. Don't think I don't realize that. This may sound far-fetched to you, but hear me out. The point of saying (or emailing) a "modest is hottest" message to a group of women is to prevent men from being tempted.  Cover yourself up or the men around you might accidentally sin because of you.  So if you dress the wrong way, if you're not covered up enough to be deemed appropriately modest, and a man does happen to fall into temptation, it is entirely your fault.  We occasionally tell men to have respect for women, but generally we just tell women to cover up.  And that causes some completely horrifying implications. 

2) It insults men. Added to the above implication is the underlying assumption that men can't be held responsible for their thoughts and actions. There were three or four times in my high school education (it was a small Christian school) in which the girls and boys were separated after chapel.  The girls stayed with a female teacher inside while the boys went outside to talk to one of the male teachers. I have no idea what the guys talked about. Who knows, maybe they were being told to dress modestly, too. (I doubt it, but it could have happened.) What I do know is that we girls got the "modesty talk". We were told things like "make sure your skirts are long enough". That in itself is good advice when it doesn't come with a double standard, but it was never just about the length of the skirts. (And personally, I'm more concerned with the fact that child slaves are making a lot of those skirts than about the length of them. You never hear a speech about that.) We were always told that men are visual creatures, that they are driven by what they see. The youth pastor at the church I went to reinforced that idea. And I'm not questioning the validity of that statement. I'm not a guy, so I wouldn't know. But all of the emphasis was on men being visually-driven. Nobody in the "modest is hottest" movement ever acknowledges the fact that so many men are intelligent enough to be held accountable for their actions. The talks that I remember getting in the all-female groups at church or school made all men sound like they were driven by sex and sex alone. Just like we devalue women with this thinking, we devalue everything about men - their personalities, their intelligence, their goals, and all other important aspects -- and we reduce them to non-thinking animals that can't be expected to control themselves. And that's not correct or fair. 

All of this to say that I think we should retire the old cliche. So yes, do consider what other people see when you get dressed in the morning, but that applies to both sexes. Do make it a point to respect everybody, and again, that applies to both sexes. And remember to consider the deeper implications of the words we use so often, even if it does seem like good advice. 

Childhood Cancer Awareness

Truly, I am grateful for the invention of penicillin.  I was grateful for it last week when it got rid of the strep throat illness that I woke up with one morning.  I’ll be grateful again on Saturday.  I’m less grateful right now since the strep is gone but I still have two more pills to take and the stupid things make me nauseated.  I’ve got things to do.  I don’t have time to keep my eyes closed all day because a crooked stack of books on the shelf  gave me motion sickness.  Seriously.    

But I only had to deal with medicines making me sick for a total of ten days.  After ten days I go right back to feeling fine.  I’ll throw away the prescription bottle and forget all about those pills.  A lot of people aren’t so lucky, and a lot of those people are children.  Imagine being a small child on medicine, medicine that requires regular trips to the hospital.  Your life may depend on it, but it’s also making you sick.  Children receiving chemotherapy or other forms of cancer treatment have major obstacles preventing them from just enjoying childhood.  

Childhood cancer research is ridiculously underfunded, too.  And you'd have a hard time finding out about any awareness campaign without digging for it.  Today I walked into a grocery store and found support for two different campaigns to fight breast cancer.  And yes, breast cancer needs to be fought.  But so does pediatric cancer, and in spite of the efforts of organizations such as Alex's Lemonade Stand  and CureSearch, the public just does not get to hear enough about how to help.  One of my former professors has a son who is basically a superhero.  He battled cancer as a very young child and is currently in remission.  This professor has been posting a lot about pediatric cancer awareness on facebook, and I had to ask her what organizations support childhood cancer.  Out of the list she gave me, I'd heard of one.  One.  And that's not for lack of effort on the part of the organizations, either.  

September is childhood cancer awareness month.  Take a moment to click on some of those links above to see how you can help.  

If you'd like to help an orphan with cancer, please turn your attention to Mark in Latin America.  He's currently battling Leukemia without a family to support him.  

Lifeboats

“Fifteen hundred people went into the sea when the Titanic sank from under us.  There were twenty boats floating nearby, and only one came back.  One.  Six were saved from the water, myself included.  Six.  Out of fifteen hundred.  Afterward the seven-hundred people in the boats had nothing to do but wait – wait to die, wait to live, wait for an absolution that would never come.”

A good sad movie should leave you with something.  A sense of hope.  A catharsis.  “Titanic”, the movie based off of the actual ship, doesn’t provide that for me, though I know it does for others.  I don’t cry when I watch the movie.  I just sit there with a hollow sense of depression and a Celine Dion song stuck in my head.  So much hopelessness and futility permeates those final scenes as water fills the boat, as people wait to drown, as people scream for help in the freezing ocean while those who steer the lifeboats paddle away and refuse to turn around.  The lifeboat pilots had an excuse.  Surely, as one character reasoned, if they had turned around the boats would have been swarmed by desperate people.  The boats would have gone under.

Oh, but wouldn’t it have been worth it to try?  To attempt to save even just one more life?  To release even one more person from the cruelty of the freezing water?  Would you be able to live with yourself knowing that you paddled to safety and ignored the dying?  Would it not be better to die than to live like that? 

More than six people could have been saved if only those lifeboats had turned around.  But the lifeboats just kept moving slowly in the other direction because the people inside counted their own lives, their own safety, as more important than everyone else’s. 

The one boat that turned around got there too late. 

Fifteen thousand people.  Six were rescued.  Six. 

Do you know where I’m about to go from here?

The Titanic is gone.  But there are so many people who are still waiting for a lifeboat.  You and I have managed to paddle to safety, to a world of comfort, plenty of food, of warmth, and of opportunity.  But we’re steadily rowing our lifeboats away from the people who are trapped and screaming for us to help them because we count our own safety and comfort as more important than theirs. 

The world had one hundred and forty three million orphans.  At least.  We have the lifeboats.  They have nothing to do but wait, just like those left in the ocean.  They’re waiting to live or to die.  We can do something.  If only eight percent of the Christians in the world chose to help just one child, the crisis would be over.  The children wouldn’t sink.  They wouldn’t be left to die.  But we’re all still rowing away and hoping that somebody else turns around.  Somebody else can risk being pulled into the water.  And as a result, only a few are rescued. 

The full weight of the Titanic tragedy hits during the scene when two men row a single lifeboat back out into the ocean.  “Is there anybody alive out there?”  One calls repeatedly, his voice echoing across the icy water.  “Is there anybody alive out there?” 

“These are all dead,” replies the other.  “We came too late.”

We came too late. 

Please.  Don’t be too late.  They’re calling for help.

Turn your boat around. 

Les Miserables: "And the Righteous Hurry Past"

This post contains many, many, many spoilers for Les Miserables.  If you haven't seen the musical, watched the movie, or read the amazing novel by Victor Hugo, go do one of those things immediately, and then read this post.  You'll thank me later.  :) 

I fell in love with Les Miserables when I was fourteen years old and my mom gave me one of the cast albums for Christmas.  At the time I knew absolutely nothing about the show, and my mom only knew that it had won a bunch of awards.  I sat down with my pink CD player and headphones on Christmas day, and I listened to the entire album from start to finish.  It was beautiful.  I was confused about some of the finer points of the story, but I still loved it.  Since then, I've seen the show live twice, and I've watched the 25th Anniversary Concert DVD more times than I can count.

It's gotten much more attention now, though, since the release of the movie.  There are pros and cons to this movie, but overall I enjoyed it.  The thing that really bothers me, though, is the reaction that I've seen from several Christians.  Some love it, some hate it, but the most common response to the movie is:

"I thought it was good, but I wish there weren't so many inappropriate parts in it".

A lot of Christians have advised their friends to get the DVD so they can watch Les Miserables but fast forward past "Lovely Ladies", a song about prostitution.  The ClearPlay DVD player will automatically filter out all of those undesirable parts for you.  Yes, that thing actually exists.  Not only will it skip past "Lovely Ladies", it will also get rid of the profanities, blood, and violence.  Let me remind you that this musical is the story of a revolution.  Violence is sort of an integral part.

You'd miss all but 20 minutes of the film. 

So what is it that makes Les Miserables "inappropriate"?  Let's go back to the "Lovely Ladies" example.   The scene begins as Fantine, hoping to sell a necklace to earn money for her child, tentatively walks down a dark street.  Prostitutes in low-cut dresses sing loudly about all the different men they sleep with.  Customers make innuendos about male and female anatomy.  The audience hears solicitations, arguments, and jokes about STDs.  The song makes a lot of people uncomfortable.  It makes me uncomfortable.  I often skip past that song when I'm listening to one of the cast recordings.  But I don't look away when I'm watching the musical.  I'd be missing the point if I did.

See, the vast majority of Christians in developed nations lead easy lives.  Generally speaking, we have beds to sleep in, food to eat, and clothes to wear.  We get dressed up to go to church on Sundays.  We sing our songs.  We stay comfortable.  We have the luxury of protecting ourselves from what we think is inappropriate.  We filter out the sex and profanity.  And up to a certain point, that's fine.  It gets problematic, though, when we whitewash our religion and refuse to acknowledge that such things exist.

I cried harder at the end of "Lovely Ladies" than I did during any other scene of Les Miserables.  Fantine has just lost her job.  She has no way to provide for her child.  She sells a necklace, her hair, and two of her teeth.  Finally, as a last desperate resort, she turns to prostitution just like the rest of the women on that street.  We see her leading a strange man into a shack:

"Come on, Captain,

you can wear your shoes. 

Don't it make a change 

to have a girl who can't refuse? 

Easy money, lying on a bed. 

Just as well, they never see 

the hate that's in your head. 

Don't they know they're making love to one already dead?" 

After the man sleeps with Fantine, he gets up, buttons his pants, tosses some money in her direction, and walks away without a word.  It's as if Fantine isn't even human.  To this man, she isn't.  As far as he's concerned, she doesn't have a name, a personality, or a dream.  She's an object that can be used for sex and then ignored.  And as he walks away, we see the horrible emotional damage, the illness, the feelings of worthlessness, and the degradation that Fantine is left with.  

It's far too easy for us to look away, to ignore, to say "That's inappropriate.  I don't want to see that." And then we miss the message.  Our Christian filters work automatically now.  They very quickly declare "sex in a musical is bad" without stopping to think about why it might need to be there.  We can turn away from Fantine's plight if it offends our sensibilities, but so many people can't turn away because they live that life every single day.  They have no choice.  Fantine didn't choose prostitution.  Cosette didn't choose to be an orphan.  Eponine didn't choose poverty and crime.   But they got stuck with it anyway.  Just like millions and millions of people who live real lives outside of the movie screen.  

We have the choice to look away.  Fantine never had that choice.  What would you do if you found yourself among a group of prostitutes in reality instead of on the movie screen?  Would you offer kindness?  Would you fight to end the degradation?  Or would you turn away, forget their humanity, and decide that this is "inappropriate"?

I'd hope not, because Jesus never did.  The religious leaders of his day turned from what they thought was inappropriate, but Jesus didn't look away from the suffering.  He was right in the middle of it.  He ate meals with tax collectors.  He sat down with a woman who'd slept several men.   

The important thing to remember about Les Miserables is that the sex, profanity, and violence isn't there just to show sex, profanity, and violence.  It's there to remind us that suffering exists, that terrible things happen, and that so many hurting and desperate people are ignored by those who have the luxury to do so.  Consider these lyrics:

And the righteous hurry past.

They don't here the little ones crying,

and the plague is coming on fast, 

ready to kill.  One day nearer to dying. 

So when you watch Les Miserables or any other art that highlights human suffering, are you one of the "righteous" that hurry past in order to avoid being offended? Or will you open your eyes?  Challenge yourself to pursue the second option.  It might just help you to notice the suffering beyond the silver screen.