*  *  *

When The Aborigines Aren't

Alabama State Legislature image

Scott Beason, Alabama’s powerful state senator and chairman of their rules committee, has issued a mea culpa over his remarks concerning Blacks which were picked up on an FBI surveillance tape as part of the ubiquitous corruption cases that seem to plague any place where gambling is permissible. Beason was working for the FBI so he presumably knew he was being taped. Press reports indicate that the tape was played during a trial and Senator Beason has been confronted with his inflammatory remarks. Here they are:

"That's y'all's Indians," one Republican said.

"They're aborigines, but they're not Indians," Beason replied. (NYT)

His use of the term "aborigines" as an apparent stand-in for African-Americans is resulting in calls for him to step down from his leadership position, at least. The press has also called the term "racially charged."

Perhaps Scott Beason was assuming that all aborigines are black, since some are, including in Australia. Of course, aboriginal people are defined as the earliest known populations of a region, thus they may be of many other races, as they are in Canada and elsewhere.

Ironically, Native Americans (as in: "That's y'all's Indians") are American aborigines. Blacks are not only not originally from America, but were brought here forcefully and in bondage. They are the least aboriginal of peoples. Could they have gotten it more wrong?

A further irony is that in popular culture, aboriginal people, both Native Americans and Australians, are venerated for their wisdom and unique cultural folkways as in the Australian "walkabout." Thus, if the term was employed in a negative connotation, it backfired.

epress.anu.edu.au

It is true that racism properly turns on intent, but if this qualifies, it’s only by the skin of its (aboriginal) teeth. This is far more a case of ignorance run riot. Were he to be stripped of his leadership position it should be for the far more compelling reason of a desperately low IQ. (Though admittedly, if a low IQ becomes a bar to elective office, many chairs will be empty.)

In the end, the concern with the "head on a platter" approach to all charges of racism is that we will inevitably lose our sense of moral outrage at those acts of racial hatred that are truly borne of malice and premeditation.

That would be a tragedy.

………. Eric Lamar

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

Sex and Firefighting

My colleague Firegeezer ran a story HERE yesterday about two LAFD engine crews purportedly assisting in the filming of sexually explicit media by leaving their rig unattended so that "stars" could use them as a prop. The NBC affiliate played a portion of the film where a woman exposed herself to strangers as LAFD crew members seemed to watch, innocently enough, with the engine in the background.

The news story is being pitched as another example of the "firefighters act unprofessionally" genre, (yawn), complete with an on-camera interview with an outraged LAFD fire official. Much more interesting is the choice of material and set, as well as the overall subject of sexual desire and firefighting.

Just what makes a fire engine sexual, anyway?

Well, let’s go beyond the propriety of having the rig do "double duty" as a porn prop and dwell on the fascinating "why" of it. Some thoughts come to mind.

- First, fire is implicitly sexual. After all, an especially lusty sexual object or act is "hot", as in, "you’re HOT." In fact, some arsonists derive sexual pleasure from fire-setting and many are those who suggest that the line between starting them and putting them out is thinner than we would like to think.

- More practically, it was a cheap way for firefighters to ogle some female flesh (though the eventual cost may be exorbitant.) And, perhaps they stored those images up for later use…or not so later. (Is that against the rules, too?)

- It obviously provided a visual backdrop, a fire engine, that people associate with excitement, danger, risk, and thrills—things, that coincidentally and at least in the abstract, makes sex better.

- Finally, it was OUTDOORS, another curious enhancer of sexual desire what with the chance of getting caught with your pants down, literally. For many, sexual activity is all about the specter of getting caught—it heightens the experience. Since risk is essential to firefighting, images of firefighting could elevate sexual tension by implying risk visually.

The firefighters failed the creativity test, though, at least in the footage I saw, by failing to have the "star" dress up in turnout gear, which is of course, a huge turn-on. Who, after all, doesn’t like a good costume as part of the fun? (And what firefighter hasn’t been asked (at least once) to dress up for bedtime?)

Of course, costumes pave the way for a little "role play" where participants are allowed, encouraged even, to exchange their everyday personas for their alter egos where they can cast-off or take-on power as part of the fulfillment of sexual desire in a fantasy environment. Many assume that sex is about power but equally so it is apparently about the giving up of it as in the recent NYT story of a police officer who "put on adult diapers, women’s dresses or ladies tights and masturbated while he forced his wife to watch." (Watching should be strictly voluntary.)

Perhaps the real problem with the LAFD scenario is the selfish choice of female stars offering up their forbidden treasure in our profession where women are constantly harassed and more as they just try to do their jobs. I wonder if the crew from E-263 thought about having some hunky, ripped dude with 6-pack abs get up there and show off the package?

Examiner.com

 Like I said, watching would be strictly voluntary. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.) 

………. Eric Lamar

*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

What's Past is Prologue

In last week’s post (HERE) I compared firefighting and the tactics and casualties of the First World War as a means of discussing firefighter fatalities which drew the ire of at least one reader who responded that it was "pretentious", a choice of words that got me thinking, which is always a dangerous thing.

What was interesting was not that he found the comparison wrong or inappropriate (the similarities between firefighting and combat are so numerous as to speak for themselves) but rather that the idea of making a comparison would be controversial in the first place. We may like to define ourselves by our perceived differences, both personal and professional, but the truth is that our lives are defined by our sameness.

Humans are a species, and, as such, we have only cosmetic variations that in the context of real differences leave us virtually identical. Other differences are cultural or tribal and are patterns of behavior that can be altered, changed, learned or forgotten. Various religions are also a form of cultural behavior that are themselves hotly debated for their differences but that are often very similar as they mostly lay claim to a higher power to guide mortal life or give promise of an afterlife, or both. Our tribes, cultures and religions may give us meaning and a sense of belonging in life but even in that they accomplish a purpose that is essentially identical. It turns out that we all need the same things.

Human motivation is also the same—it is about the challenge of the scarcity of resources. For all of human time we have made decisions simple and complex, large and small, mundane and earth-shattering over the allocation of resources. The earliest peoples moved from place to place in search of life sustaining resources and adapted to various climates because of food, water and shelter. Expanding populations forced people into new areas and the "stronger" tribe forced the weaker tribes to move on to other places. All conflicts stem from, in one way or another, the belief in the need to control resources.

Pick any period and any place and the subtext for all activity is the complex challenge of people gaining control over the resources that are relevant in their time. Food, water, land, precious metals, and energy are the universal motivators for human behavior because they support life and represent power and wealth.

Our sense of modernity makes us view our predecessors as fundamentally different and also smugly translates into an undue sense of wisdom. Surely we must be smarter and better because of our mastery of electricity, gravity and incipient artificial intelligence. We shouldn’t feel guilty about that, though, as they thought the same about their first fire, the wheel, and the steam engine. Even in our smugness we are the same as our ancient ancestors though we can "tweet" to one another about our (false) feelings of superiority.

Viewed in the context of human motivation and similarity over all of history, the complexity of modern life and our uniqueness is a myth. Each and every generation fights the same battles and has the same inflated notion of importance and the sense that "now" is the special time. It isn’t. It’s just happens to be our time to make of it what we will. Which is a very long-winded way of saying that it’s not pretentious to make a comparison—it’s pretentious not to make one because in the words of the Bard, "What’s past is prologue."

………. Eric Lamar

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

Note: This is Part Two of a 5-part commentary that will run each morning this week.  Begin reading the series  with Part One HERE.

 US Conspiracies: We Can Do That

Conspiracists are aided by the fact that in the US, and at the highest levels, we engage in a wide variety of conspiracies to shape events. Our contemporary history is a litany of high level government officials engaging in unscrupulous actions to influence world events.

- John Kennedy successfully conspired to overthrow South Vietnamese leader Ngo Ding Diem, resulting in Diem’s murder.

- Kennedy also sanctioned a number of CIA plots to kill Fidel Castro ranging from the comic to the absurd.

- Richard Nixon successfully conspired to overthrow Chile’s democratically elected president Salvador Allende who was subsequently killed.

- Nixon also conspired to cover-up his role in the botched break-in at Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Complex in Washington, DC. He resigned because of it.

-Ronald Reagan’s closest advisers approved financing Central American insurgents in a complicated, illegal and ultimately unsuccessful “money for missiles conspiracy” with Iran.

 What these events and others have in common is:

 -they involve generally small groups of very smart people who have the discipline, training and resources to keep a secret.

-they are a highly selective group chosen for their intellect, experience and for understanding the importance of information security.

-they are vetted exhaustively during the recruitment process to ensure that their personal and professional backgrounds lend support to their ability to engage in confidential work.

You might have noticed that these US conspiracies are widely known and documented in media and academia with scores of citations and ever expanding converging sources of information and affirmation. They are undisputed in the main because information about them, including participants, means and methods trickled out and then became a torrent of reliably vetted facts because of our congenital inability to hide the interesting or infamous. In our country, you just can’t keep a secret, especially a really good (or heinous) one.

In each case, and in dozens of other lesser ones, either a direct participant or a supporting person “spilled the beans” or evidence of the activities was available to reporters or researchers merely by looking, asking or filing a FOIA. And, conspiracists often choose to explain or interpret their actions in light of national security or patriotism. (The renowned Dr. Johnson famously said, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” Always beware when folks, even firefighters, wrap themselves in Old Glory.)

Scoundrels we may be, but secret keepers we are most assuredly not.

The conclusion can only be that America is not conspiracy free but rather that we are historically incapable of keeping them quiet. Perhaps it is the combination of a (mostly free) press and the fact that no matter how secret the secret, everybody tells somebody.

Whatever the reason, the notion that Americans can perpetrate large (or even small) scale conspiracies and successfully maintain their secrecy is absurd, inane and ridiculous. Even the “single cell” conspiracies enumerated above fell apart quickly and completely under the scrutiny of the press and the public. The larger the alleged conspiracy, including ones involving the destruction of huge buildings and the deaths of thousands of people, the less likely that there is any truth in it or that it could be kept secret for ten seconds, much less ten years.

 Part Three:  Anatomy of a Conspiracist: Smarter Than the Average Bear? is HERE.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

Note:  This is the first part of a 5-part commentary that will run each morning this week.

"Remember the Maine":  Our Love Affair with Conspiracy

I recently ran across a website, apparently under the control of a Seattle firefighter, Erik Lawyer, which asks firefighters to wake up and smell the 9/11 Thermite. Thermite is what 9/11 conspiracists insist was used to destroy the Twin Towers and Building 7. The website is a collection of recycled propaganda delivered in the outraged tone of committed conspiracists who stand ready and able to educate the ignorant and gullible masses about the secret and evil hands guiding our country. It calls for "an investigation" which presumes that no effective investigation has occurred. Lawyer asks, "What are they hiding?" and "Don’t we deserve the truth?" His questions infer either that there is something to hide or the presence of an evil force lying to US citizens.

I usually ignore such trash but it was sent by a non-firefighter with the note "this is legit." Lawyer says that "our communities trust us" and cites that as a reason for firefighters to sign a petition and to become involved in trafficking in absurdities and ridiculous assertions. Such folly can have grave implications. I sincerely hope we know better but I wouldn’t necessarily bet on that.

On February 15, 1898, the US Battleship Maine, moored in Havana Harbor in Cuba, exploded and sank taking with her a majority of the crew. There are at least three potential causes: undetected fire in a forward coal bunker leading to the detonation of black powder stored nearby, the striking of a mine or the intentional sinking of the ship. The second reason, a mine strike, was the one chosen as the pretext to go to war with Spain. Some have favored the more insidious rationale that we deliberately sank our own ship for the same purpose. To this day, despite over a hundred years of investigations, doubts remain. In fact, subsequent investigations, always employing "new" technology have allowed new "facts" and information to surface that fail to substantiate such a conspiracy.

The evidence supports the conclusion that a fire in the coal bunker did indeed ignite black powder and cause a devastating explosion. The continued notion of a deliberate conspiracy over the destruction of the Maine and her crew is evidence of our historical preoccupation with conspiracies as a way of explaining unpleasant events. Those who say we sank our own ship use a sad event to concoct a bogus story for their own gratification. Sound familiar?

Americans have an on-going fascination with the island of Cuba and we are always looking for ways to appropriate it. Ironically, in 1854, 44 years before the Maine, then President Franklin Pierce engaged in a conspiracy with a US diplomatic emissary to wrest Cuba from Spain in what has come to be known as the "Ostend Manifesto." But, more on Presidents and conspiracies tomorrow.

Saying the destruction of the Maine was a deliberate act of the US government or its agents is an earlier example of conspiracists at work. They saw in the catastrophe an omniscient force, one that had the power to shape world history by manipulating events in order to achieve a specific outcome. It is a reoccurring theme of conspiracists who see in great events such as wars, assassinations and even the Great Depression, the invisible hands of nefarious leaders plotting to control the world.

Conspiracists exploit perceived anomalies: any detail that appears to be in any way inconsistent is proof positive that the entire given explanation for an event is a contrived lie. But the method does not explain the madness of conspiracists. Just what is the attraction for those intent on seeing dark and evil shadows all around us?

Part Two:  US Conspiracies: We Can Do That is posted HERE.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *

…. And Getting Personal

Note:  A recent article in the Washington Post reported on the conclusion of a jury trial in which a sexual harrassment complainant was awarded a settlement.  The original incident took place in 2001.  For background you can read the STORY HERE.

Questions Asked During a Fairfax County Fire and Rescue Department (FCFRD) Recruitment Interview:

Does your husband approve of this profession?

Do you enjoy having sex with more than one partner?

Do you like to be watched while you masturbate?

First, a disclosure: I was affiliated with FCFRD from 1975 to 1998 and I know many of the persons referenced in US District Court Judge Cacheris’s Memorandum .

Fairfax, often seen as an innovator, once again moves to the front of the line by introducing blatant sexual harassment as part of the hiring process. Why wait till the fire house if you can start during the interview process?

The County’s attorneys, famous for pursuing odious cases that damage the institutional fabric of the community and the agencies involved, did their lawyerly best to destroy plaintiff’s claims that sex toy inquiries do not a happy work place make. The jury thought otherwise, taking all of three hours to decide that $250K is the direct cost to taxpayers when fire officers add sex-based questions to the interview process.

Defendant’s likely motivation? He’s lazy, of course. He employed the Bill Clinton/John Ensign "look no further than those I have power over" approach to lining up the next orgasm. The judge (and I’ll bet the jury) took special offence to the defendant’s repeated assertions that he "knew things about her", a gross power play that smacks of blackmail or coercion.

This case is especially egregious as it involved a prospective employee and the perpetrator was a supervisor. Once it was brought to light, management’s no nonsense and courageous response was a letter of reprimand and a transfer, actions sure to strike mortal fear in the hearts of sexual harassers everywhere. Actual leaders would, of course, understand that since their own managers were engaging in such conduct that something a little more costly than a reprimand would be necessary. But not in Fairfax, apparently.

Judge Cacheris’s memorandum details a fire-rescue department immersed in a culture saturated with sexual banter, and worse. One fire fighter said ‘he "knows" that comments such as "tea bagging" [a slang term for oral sex] and "protein shake," a slang term for ejaculation, happen "everyday" both at his fire station and others and "that is how [the Department]is[, and] it has always been like that…’

And, there are other shoes to drop. Another federal trial alleging more sexual harassment is slated to begin next month, apparently involving some of the same players. At least it should make the deposition process easier. Maybe the attorneys will offer a two-for-one discount, though I doubt it.

But seriously, in the "management’s always right" Commonwealth of Virginia, Fairfax County’s attorneys will once again line up behind the knuckleheads, waste another million bucks or so and permanently alienate women in the FCFRD. What they should do instead, is take a hard look at the abysmal lack of leadership that gave rise to this ship wreck and make some changes before the whole operation glides beneath the waves in a most ungraceful fashion. But I won’t hold my breath for that.

To end on a slightly tangential but never-the-less relevant note, it is these cases that give the lie to all of the apocalyptic prophecies regarding gays and lesbians serving in the military or uniformed services. With but the most rare of exceptions, heterosexuals are in absolute and total command of both the workplace sex and sexual harassment fields and are not destined to relinquish claim to either in the foreseeable future. The specter of randy "queers" invading the workplace cruising for easy sex is insulting, ridiculous, and absurd. That job is already "firmly in hand", no pun intended, and Fairfax is the most recent proof of that.

……… Eric Lamar

　*  *  *  *  *  *  *