Open Letter

I wasn't planning on writing on my blog today, but something happened: I saw a tweet that got me started. This is the tweet:

I found it sad that someone who calls himself a "reader" can't tell the difference between these two events. To anyone reading my post, claiming to be a "reader" and struggling with recognizing the differences between these two events, like the author of the tweet, may I suggest reading How to Read a Book by Mortimer J. Adler?

The rest of this post is an open letter to the author of this tweet, who later in his thread insults people whose views don't agree with his:

A guy's innocent joke about answering a question upset you so much you blocked him, but another can't feel rage when their religion is “not so innocently” attacked? What happened to the freedom of expression you were defending with your tweet?

Feel free to block me, or better yet call me the names a “real man” calls a woman when she points out his nonsense.

What happened to the professor is a tragedy. It's sick. It should have never happened. Provoking people by ridiculing their belief system isn't “teaching,” though. If it is, please feel free to answer the following questions: What exactly did he teach? Is every individual's opinion on things now considered history?

There is a reason politics and religion are never to be discussed in a classroom. History, and religion, can be taught with respect. Even a professor's personal opinion can be expressed without disrespect.

I've taught for over thirty years. My students have asked me so many times about my religious beliefs in general. They've also asked me specifically if I was a Buddhist, a Muslim, a Christian, or if I even believed in God. I've always answered truthfully and respectfully.

My students are well familiar with my sense of humor, and there are jokes to be made about every single religion, cult, and belief. But just because I have a “right” to express myself doesn't mean I should use it in such a negative way.

And what happened to the rights of the person who was recently jailed for saying that the professor “deserved” what he got? Did that person not have said freedom of expression?

It's not easy to be fair, is it? When people view things from the perspective that only serves them, they will think, say, and do stupid things -- yes, “stupid” as in the title of your book.

Professors and teachers have power in a classroom, and with power comes responsibility. There is so much that can be taught in a classroom. It's unfortunate that some choose their freedom of expression and their power to divide people in one way or another.

Did that particular professor deserve what happened to him? Absolutely not! Should the murderer be punished? Absolutely! But making this about Muslims is just as ignorant as killing someone for making fun of a religion. Doing just that serves a group of people right now, though, and there are always sheep that follow, so...

About the question initially tweeted... 

How come?

Because the professor was killed by a citizen and Floyd was killed by someone who is supposed to “protect” and “serve.” And even though “to protect and to serve” is used as a phrase without a subject or object, its implied or inferred object definitely isn't the police's or deputies' “own asses” but “the people.”

Everything that happened after the murder of Floyd happened because people finally decided to do something about the corruption of police and sheriff deputies.

In January 2016, a bunch of corrupt sheriff deputies attacked me in my own place of residence, planted fabricated evidence, and accused me of a crime I hadn't committed. Why? Because I'd spoken up when I'd witnessed their corruption and their criminal activity months before. They used an opportunity to publicly discredit me to protect their own asses. I was arrested... and released a few days later because the handwriting in the planted correspondence was analyzed, and, big surprise, it didn't match mine.

At the time, no one wanted to “get involved”... Why?

Those who knew me personally knew I would never have done what they accused me of, but they were afraid to do anything about it because those deputies were “dangerous” and they were right, and I never blamed them. Those who didn't know me “chose” to believe the lies they heard and read because it went in the same direction as their beliefs. It provided the right justification for their need to be right about their unfounded fears and beliefs. And then there were those who knew me and were secretly happy because it satisfied some of their own personal insecurities: inferiority complex, jealousy, etc.

The same people who didn't “get involved” then are now fighting for the values they now think are being attacked. Are they hypocrites? Maybe... From my perspective? Probably. That group of criminals who attacked me in my home and threatened to kill my three dogs if I took action against them and tried to eliminate me afterwards (by the way, it's called attempted murder in legal terms) got away with their crimes... but, at least, people are doing something about the existing corruption now... years later, in another state.

People simply woke up (FINALLY!) and decided something needed to be done about this corruption. The fact that people all over the world stood with this is because everyone understands how corruption works, meaning the problem is global.

You mentioned someone's lack of empathy in your tweet thread. Let's discuss that for a minute... because you're absolutely right: Empathy is a significant aspect of humanity. Have you watched the video of the murder committed by the a-holes in uniform? And can you honestly say you found empathy in that professor's caricature?

That professor is not forgotten. It's just that deep down most people understand empathy, and they can see where it's lacking. The person who committed that crime was a murderer and is being punished for his crime. Also, everyone knows how they might react when provoked. Some people destroy other people verbally; some do it physically. Both actions are wrong and should be considered crimes.

This global movement is about righting a wrong that has been going on forever. The catalyst may have been a criminal. Nobody's claiming Floyd was a saint. The focus is not on Floyd. It's on the people wearing a uniform; it's about legalized murder; it's about the ongoing murders without consequences.

To (you and) the idiots who go around destroying and murdering people who don't agree with their views, religions, and ideologies, whether they are individuals or governments, I say:

If you haven't yet understood that we are all connected, you haven't understood your own religion. At the very least, we are all connected by one golden rule, the one anyone with half a brain should have gotten by now, the one all religions have in common, the one that tells you not to do to anyone what you don't want done to you.

And now that I've upset a bunch of people, I'll go do what I was planning to do with my day: continue my proofreading assignment. Thank you for reading.

Understanding Why

I've always been drawn to languages. I like words and look at them linguistically, always trying to figure out where they came from and how they were formed. I also find the grammar of languages fascinating, and I've always excelled at explaining grammar.

I've taught English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Second Language (ESL) for over thirty years in different countries and a variety of institutions, from private language schools to technical schools to colleges to universities.

I love teaching grammar. I enjoy being present for my students' aha moments, watching the expression on their faces as they finally understand some linguistic feature that has always been a challenge to them. 

One of my favorite parts of teaching grammar is listening to or reading my students' mistakes. I like it when they make mistakes because it indicates their first step in learning something new. I always jot down my students' mistakes for two reasons:

First, mistakes constitute learning opportunities for students. I correct their mistake and make sure they understand why it's wrong and how they can say or write what they intended to without a mistake.

Second, I'm interested in the reason for the mistake. The “why” for the specific wrong usage of that particular feature is what I seek.

Understanding the why doesn't only help that one student. It helps me as a teacher, too: I learn the source of the mistake, which I often trace back to their first language; I teach that lesson better the next time, making sure to mention all the ways that feature is not used; I know what kind of confusion and mistakes to expect from students.

For instance, when I noticed many of my Chinese students were making the same kind of mistake in using verbs, especially the verb “to be,” I took an introduction to Chinese course at my local college, one of the colleges where I also taught, and learned that the Chinese don't have the verb “to be.” When they want to say “I am fine,” for example, in Chinese, they say “I fine.” The verb “to be” is not used in a language they've been practicing all their life, and it's not easy to break that habit. Understanding this will help me (1) be more tolerant of my students' repetitive mistakes, (2) explain the differences between Chinese, their first language, and English, the language they are trying to learn, (3) teach my Chinese students that when they want to express that “they fine” in English, they need to make sure to include the verb “to be” in its conjugated form, paying attention to the verb tense and the subject-verb agreement. The why behind the mistakes has always been one of the most attractive aspects of teaching.

Learning and understanding the why has made me not only a better teacher but also a better person. I am more patient and less judgmental; I accept differences more easily; I'm open to other perspectives; I learn different ways to do the same thing, get to compare them, and choose the best method for me. Overall, a lot of good comes from understanding the why behind differences.

“Peace cannot be achieved through violence; it can only be attained through understanding.”
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Pervert

Last week, a neighbor of mine, Kenny, a man in his seventies, asked me if he could take my picture. I said no. He insisted he wanted to send it to his sister because he'd mentioned me to her. I said no again. I specifically said, "I don't like having my picture taken."

Today, I was standing by my other neighbor's house, asking if he too was having problems with his internet connection, and Kenny was there. They were sitting on the porch talking. I heard a sound and noticed he had his phone lifted high toward me. He had just taken my picture with his phone. 

I asked him, "Kenny, did you just take my picture?" He replied, "I took a picture of my car, and you were standing in front of it."

I told him I didn't appreciate it. He shouted, "Fine!" My neighbor whose place it was yelled, "Why are you being a bitch about it?"

So... in this situation, I'm a bitch, and he is not a pervert. Do these people not understand the word "no"?

I walked away, feeling violated and angry, leaving two old perverts behind me as they continued to chat on the porch under their Trump 2020 flag.

My Dream Review

I only write reviews for books I really enjoy reading. I don't write negative reviews for many reasons: First, I figure I've already wasted my time reading the book, so why waste more time writing a review for it. Second, I don't see the need to put any negative energy out there. Third, there are a lot of books I enjoy that others don't, so if I don't like a book, it doesn't mean it's a bad book. Fourth, the thing that annoys me more than anything when reading a book is finding too many mistakes in it, in which case I often write to the author and offer to edit it, if, and only if, I find it worthy of being read. Fifth, maybe the author's work has improved since writing that particular book, or maybe I picked that author's worst work, and there is no need to humiliate or badmouth them at the time I've gotten to reading their book.

A while back, I read a nonfiction book that I found... what's the word for it... HORRIBLE. By the time I finished it, I was angry, not just at the author for putting together all that crap, but also with myself for continuing to read it when I sensed I shouldn't waste my time around page 80. I was hoping the good stuff would come later, I suppose. I don't know. Anyway, seven hundred pages later, I hadn't learned anything except a few acronyms. For a minute, I even thought the author should be sued for wasting people's time. I didn't write a bad review, but I looked at the reviews, only after the fact, and discovered thousands of positive reviews. I was shocked.

I still don't know exactly how reviews work, and I know some people get paid to write reviews, which I find immoral, but I couldn't understand how thousands of people may have liked this book. Had they read it? Had they actually learned something from it? I decided to get over it, so I took a deep breath and went to my bookcase to take a book I knew wouldn't disappoint just to cheer up. I have a few go-to books for times like this. This time, I chose The Awful Truth about the Sushing Prize by Marco Ocram. Soon I forgot all about the bad experience with the nonfiction, or so I thought.

This happened a couple of months ago. Fast forward to last night when thunder scared my pups and I couldn't get much sleep. During the short time I did sleep after the thunder was over, I dreamed that I was in a bookshop and I was venting about the seven-hundred-page nonfiction to a fellow book lover looking at some nonfiction books. I gave a full review for that book, stating, in great detail, everything that was wrong with it. In my dream, I was speaking fast and angrily. When I woke up, my first thought was, This is new. It was my first “dream” review. I guess there is a first time for everything. At least, I got it out of my system, hopefully for good. I'm grateful I hadn't paid for that book. I had borrowed it online, through Overdrive, from the library.

This experience taught me that book reviews don't really mean anything. I know most people decide what to read based on reviews. I don't. I like friends' recommendations, and that is friends whom I know well and who know me well. I also take recommendations from people whose intellect I admire. For nonfiction, I also often look at the table of contents, and if the topic is something I'm interested in, I read it, hoping to learn something.

What still bothers me is that book reviews affect book sales. I can't help but wonder what happens to new writers who are not known and don't get many reviews. Whether they publish their book themselves or go the traditional way, they face many more challenges than authors who are already famous, at least in terms of sales.

I remember a story I once read in a French magazine, a few decades ago, about a few university students who had typed a certain well-known author's book word for word, sent the "manuscript" to many publishers, and gotten rejection after rejection from every single publisher. Meanwhile, the actual book was selling like hotcakes in stores all over the world. Those students proved an important point. Back then, every writer had only the traditional publishing option. Nowadays, thankfully, writers have the choice to publish their work through Amazon. As readers and writers, we have an obligation to write reviews, at the very least for good books.