Roam

Here she comes
The one
That called the
Monster
Home
Brushed the
Spider Web
Took a book alone
And read
That star gazers
Can't choose which
Stars to gaze
Didn't phase her
She said
"Not by my
Eyes"

She is a
Storm
Born
From seemingly
Insurmountable nightmares
All of which were
Conquered
Quietly with
Air fare that
Made sure she
Was not
Nowhere
But rather
"There"
A new state that
Made her
Aware

The thunder is
Her heartbeat
And her love
Shocks
Like
Lightening
Tears falling like
Rain drops
On to a
World
Previously unknown
Cold hands
Covering warm face
Streetlights flickering as
The sun of
Brotherly love
Embraces and
Father time is
Acknoweledged

"You can't create
The world in
Seven days"
He said
"But you can
Be
Someone's world
In an instant
Just remember
Be your world
First
And the rest
Will work"

Her heart opens
And the
Sun
Shines through the clouds
"This is my moment
I'll make myself proud"

- PatInTheHat

NOprah

There seems to be a trending fascination among Americans that watching the world burn is actually pretty fun.

While people continue to fantasize about what it would be like to live in a Post-Apocalyptic world by watching their favorite TV shows and movies, i.e. The Walking Dead, I Am Legend, The Book of Eli, etc., the signs of a non-fiction version of the apocalypse are displayed on our favorite news stations. For example, channels like CNN and MSNBC regularly have conversations to the effect of the following questions: Is Donald Trump actually going to press the nuke button? Is he going to drive someone else, like Kim Jong Un, to press the nuke button? Is some other fed up, last-leg nation going to press the nuke button, because they have nothing left to lose? These inquisitive scenarios are all hypothetical, but if just one of them happened, then there you have it: A kind of post-apocalypse in the making.

During 2017, we saw the face of the US's potential demise sworn in as POTUS. Similar to how many of us felt on November 9th, 2016, January 20th, 2017 wasn't much better. Many of us could see what was on the way: Social progress derailment, the loss of confidence and support from our foreign allies, the spiraling crash landing of a once great nation. Now that we're in January, 2018, we can all see that we were, fortunately, pretty wrong. Sure, Trump has tried--continues to try--to thwart social progress, to make sworn enemies threaten nuclear war, to masquerade his idiocy with intellect, but overall he's been unsuccessful. Today, social groups, protesters, anti-fascists, and the like are out in droves to maintain some semblance of sanity. The Trump administration has taught us, perhaps more so than any other administration in the history of the US of A, that a presidency does not define the rest of the country and that the government can only lead effectively through partnership with the rest of the American people. I'm confident that we all previously thought that to be true, but the evidence in support is direct. The "Stable Genius" can't solely rely on the horses he appointed to pass country-wide federal laws.

What we absolutely can not do is fight insanity with insanity--the metaphorical "watching the world burn." At the Golden Globes this past week, Oprah Winfrey gave an absolutely magnificent speech upon receipt of the Cecil B. DeMille award. She absolutely deserves the lifetime achievement award, and her speech on sexual harassment, along with her support of the #MeToo movement was powerful! Her work in and out of film has been exemplary. Sure, she may have been the reason for some people we might not like so much, i.e. Dr. Oz, Dr. Phil, etc., but I have little doubt that her heart was and always has been in the right place. I even look forward to her performance in the live action remake of one of my favorite books "A Wrinkle in Time." That said, she absolutely should not run for presidency. Though I agree that Oprah would be a better president than Donald Trump, it doesn't mean it should happen. Harking back to overly sarcastic, exaggerated statements like, "Bah! My big toe could be a better president than he is!" The dissection of which would resolve to something like, "1. This is probably true, but 2. It shouldn't happen. Your big toe should not run for presidency. I would guess it's fairly consistently in the dark on major topics."

Ha.

The Trump administration has fostered the formation of hard working, no nonsense protesters as well as, on the other hand, large-scale complacency throughout the country for the desperate desire of having anyone else not named "Trump" as president. It needs to be understood: This. Is. A. Problem. Too. This is not to say that Oprah is a know-nothing bullshitter. She's intelligent. She's kind. Her generosity is right around Ellen level. She has connections. She has the money to run, campaign, etc. But, and similar to the questions we were all asking about Trump, what on Earth does she know about running a country? Does she understand economics on a national and even global scale? Does she know anything about running a military? Does she understand the consequences of both militaristic actions and the lack thereof? Socially speaking, I don't have any questions. I have no doubt that she has the capability of championing minority groups into the future, but we all know that's not all what the presidency is about. This is also not to say that the next president needs to be a seasoned politician. I'm not of that belief. Politicians, as we have seen, have the same capability of running the country into the ground as a non-politician. There are, however, many up and coming politicians, i.e. Kamala Harris, Joe Kennedy III, to name a couple, and others that are great-minded, younger politicians with a solid political background, many of whom have social progress, economic progress, and the gradual ease of aggressive military strategy as major platform attachments.

The biggest lesson anyone can learn from the past election is to take elections in general more seriously. A country is not a game show--it shouldn't be run by a game show host. A country is, more than land, the people whom inhabit it. And if the majority of the people who inhabit it are genuinely afraid of someone leading the country into a deeper pit of ignorant marginalization, economic disparity, and an overall fear for well being, then maybe we should listen.

- PatInTheHat

Groundhog Day

Wake up late. Have breakfast. Turn on the TV. News on. "Oh, another mass shooting." Finish breakfast. Open iPad. Social media. Yelling. Screaming. Crying out.

A void.

Check fantasy. Put in Frank Gore or Javorius Allen? It's Allen's week to make big plays. "Ha." Change channel to football. Watch football all day. "Breaking News" scrolls across the bottom of the screen. Twenty-six dead. Twenty more injured. Church shooting. "News?"

My team won today. Fans bled green. Metaphor. My team will make the playoffs. I'll see about the Super Bowl. Turn off TV.

Open laptop. Open XCom 2. Play as a human resistance force. Defeat enemies from a different world that have infiltrated Earth's world order. Stop them from producing more enemy aliens using gene therapy on humans. Prevent a horrible end to the world. "Unfamiliar."

Turn on TV for night football. More news on shooting before. Trump tweeted. Predictable. "Let me guess: Thoughts and prayers?"

Crack open a beer. Football back on. Need Crabtree to do well. Game is exciting.

Relax.

Open iPad. Social media. Posts about shooting. Posts about shooting. Posts about shooting. Mental illness. Poor guy. White. Gun laws. People fighting. Fighting a fight. Quicksand. Powerless. "I think I'll see my parents tomorrow."

Game's about over. "But is it, really?"

Bed time.

- PatInTheHat

Me Too

It isn't enough to apologize on behalf to all of the women posting "Me Too" on social medias. It isn't enough to say it'll all be OK or that this issue will drift away in time. It isn't enough to respond with "I believe you" in response. And, that's right, it's not enough for me to write this article.

I cannot think of a better reason, unfortunately, to come out of my writing hiatus than to talk about the issue of sexual assault. Yes, it's a tough subject--and it's an even tougher subject to those it has happened to--but it's a topic that needs to be talked about and discussed if for no other reason than to create complete and total awareness to help ensure this nonsense stops happening.

First, I'm going to address the males. Guys, let's have a talk. I know it won't be an easy one, and I'm sure to peeve some of you off, but I feel like there is something important that has to be said: When women are posting "Me Too" to imply that they, too have been sexually abused in their lives, please do not comment with, "That happened to me, too." There are a lot of problems with commenting this way regardless of what precedes or follows for a couple reasons. 1. It trivializes the woman's assault in question 2. You look like an attention hoarder and that moment is just 100% not the time, and 3. This is where you might get a bit upset with me, and honestly, that's OK. I can handle it. But if you were ever sexually assaulted by a woman, I'm here to tell you that it's just absolutely not the same. Though there are exceptions i.e. Being drugged, date raped, or being too drunk to function, let's understand those happenstances are quite different than the average female to male encounter. Before you start throwing expletives at me--which, again, you could do--I'm not remotely trying to tell you that you being sexually assaulted isn't a problem. What I'm trying to tell you is that male on female sexual assault is far more prevalent. Moreover, a male is on average about twice the size of a woman making it harder for a woman to do anything about the assault. Also, I really don't think you want me to include the statistics for how often male on female sexual assault leads to the female either dying from the encounter or committing suicide later down the line. What I will say: The numbers aren't  good. Therefore, male on female assault is considerably more of a problem. For some direction on how to act on this, just look at female suffrage. Did you hear from female rights activists in the '60's during the Civil Rights movement? If you did, how often? Didn't live in the '60s? OK let's talk about the last 5 years. Women believe so strongly in equality that they even put their own grievances aside--if only momentarily--in favor of black/other minority rights. Similarly, I'm asking you to put aside your own grievances for the cause of insuring this type of abuse stops happening to women. Although hard to prove, I'd bet that if this stopped happening to women--and so frequently--that it would more quickly stop happening to men. So, in other words, by aiding in the removal of male on female sexual abuse you then help your own cause to ensure it stops happening to you. Kinda like how the removal of patriarchal anecdotes, biases, stereotypes, etc.--or one of the ultimate goals of feminism--also benefits men.

Lastly, to the women: This is embarrassing. My empathy billows over the rim of the societal glass for these heinous actions against you. Similar to how white people need to keep other white people in check to thwart racism--nonexclusive, of course--it is also up to men to keep other men in check to thwart the behaviors of sexual irreverence. My promise to you is that my effort will not yield. Though I have put in effort previously, I must confess that I have not done enough. You have all made that abundantly clear. So, your grievance is also my cross to bear. I will continue to listen to your outcries, but I hope that they diminish. Not because of those that try to silence you, but because the occurrence stops happening. I sincerely hope that your struggle does not end in self-inflicted demise. Please seek the attention you need in order to keep your head above the fire and smoke. I know that it will be a hard step to take, but if it means your well-being, then it may be necessary. My heart is with you. Good luck.

- PatInTheHat

Coming Soon!

Ever since I was 16/17 years old, I had the idea of creating a YouTube channel. Even 8 or 9 years ago, people were already figuring out cool and creative ways to either express themselves or express their art. Although I'm not 100% sure exactly what I'm going to do yet, I'm definitely going to make it happen!

YouTube has changed a lot in the last 8/9 years, so I'm definitely not using the platform for the sake of monetary gain, but rather a means of communication. I have been doing the "blog thing" for around 3 years now, and as much as I like to write, I enjoy even more to engage other people and other perspectives--something I don't feel like is as easy to do on this platform. Having only a brief outline of ideas, my channel will likely have multiple components. In other words, the channel will not just be a "gaming" channel or a "talking head" channel, but a smorgasbord. And despite how ruthless the comment section of YT vids can be, I think it's important for me to enter an open community that dialogues. I like listening to new ideas and new perspectives, and even though YouTube can be brutal in that regard, I think it can be equally as useful.

If any of you out there are interested in the idea of this channel being created, I'm definitely up for suggestions! The timeline for the beginning of this channel's creation is currently unknown, so "soon" is as good as I'm going to be able to do right now, but I'm definitely looking to start before the end of the 2017 calendar year. Most YouTubers have a swath of videos on their channel, so I might create a cache of videos before I even publish anything to the channel so that way when I'm ready you'll know it, because you might see 4 or 5 other videos on my channel that you can watch right away. I'm also not sure what my YouTube handle will be yet. I could stick with "PatInTheHat," but I'm not set on it.

To those that are interested, I sincerely hope I don't disappoint! I'll do my best. And to those that might just stumble on it...well... I'm sorry. You're stuck with me forever. =)

- PatInTheHat

No More

I've stayed (relatively) silent since the rally that had happened in Charlottesville, Virginia this past weekend.

When tragic events happen, my process is as follows: I watch videos, if any, of the tragic events in question; then, I check out what people are doing and saying on social media and other outlets; and finally, I assess. During this process of assessing, I genuinely do my best to wear different shoes.

This time it's a lot different.

Let's briefly go back in time to the incident that occurred in Ferguson, Missouri. The altercation that occurred between Michael Brown, a civilian, and a cop, officer Wilson. Wilson was responding to a 911 call regarding a theft. The cop came to the scene, or the whereabouts thereof, and scanned the area until he saw a man matching the description of the assailant--Michael Brown. The altercation between the officer and Michael Brown occurred outside and then inside the confines of the police vehicle as Michael Brown reached into the cop car to address the officer. The officer used multiple verbal warnings, yet Michael Brown persisted. In a state of fear and/or panic, officer Wilson fired a barrage of bullets at Michael Brown killing him. Those are the facts as designated by the court documents. And even after looking at shaky video evidence and hearing from multiple different perspectives--which include reading the court transcripts--there is an overabundance of grey-area. Does it suck that there's a lot of grey? Yes. Is it arguable to say that Michael Brown acted incorrectly whether he was white, black, brown, etc? Yes. Is it arguable to say that the officer over-used his weapon? Yes. But I think what makes the entire situation the grayest--aside from the video, testimonies, protests, editorials, outside opinions, etc--is simply the heat of the moment. Officer Wilson, despite being acquitted of all charges, is the most vilified of the two people in the altercation. Michael Brown, who, according to testimony, was intoxicated with some kind of drug and stole some objects from the local convenience store. Let's stop right there. Michael Brown starts off in the wrong. Knowing that, let's now put ourselves in the shoes of  any cop who is about to approach a thief. Could the thief have a weapon and be dangerous? Yes. Could the thief try to run away from the scene upon officer arrival? Yes. What should the officer do then? Call back up right away? Chase the assailant? Should he use his gun? Michael Brown's original offence is certainly not payable on death, etc. Ok... The point of all of this is to provide context to more recent events.

Fast forward to when Philando Castile was shot and killed inside of his own car. We have video evidence of the altercation from start to finish. We have the officer's dash cam as well as the video footage from Philando Castile's girlfriend/wife with their child in the back seat of the car. Philando let the officer know, upon a traffic stop, that he was carrying a weapon legally. The officer shot and killed Philando as he reached for his paperwork i.e. owner's card, insurance card, etc. No grey area here. The officer was wrong. However, the officer was still acquitted. Did the officer also fear for his life and use information to incorrectly identify a suspected robber? Yes. But how often do we hear that story? The guy was a black guy! They all look the same! Oops!

Please try Google searching "white guy shot by police for being incorrectly identified," and you'll see Google give this face in return: O.o. The articles you'll find are of cops incorrectly shooting black citizens. Defenders will say: "But that's a problem with the media!" "This is fake news!" Or how about it's an issue with police culture? Shoot first and ask questions later, right? I digress...

Fast forward to this past Friday in Charlottesville, Virginia. Clear video evidence of Nazis and white supremacists flooding the streets. Clear video evidence of Nazi and Confederate flags lining city blocks. Where's the grey area?! If history serves me correctly: We, the United States of America, went to war with and killed these people. We went to war with the Confederacy after they had attacked Fort Sumter and after 4 long, arduous years we beat them. Killed or wounded hundreds of thousands of them to the point of their surrender. Subsequently, we turned our egos aside, and we allowed them to stay here and be a part of our country with the caveat that they could no longer hold slaves. The Union finally fought for the "Freedom" written in our constitution. Less than 80 years after the end of the Civil War, we fought against the Nazi regime. We fought against the dehumanization of millions of people. We fought, again, against the idea that certain people should be taken advantage of just because of their religion, the color of their skin, the color of their hair, etc. And we won that fight, too! So how are our domestic police--our domestic authorities--not taking down the very same people we took down in Germany? In Belgium? The beaches of Normandy? Wasn't this train of thought, let alone the actions that tend to follow, supposed to be eradicated? And forget whether they were "allowed!" Why didn't they take more actions into their own hands? What happened to shoot first, ask questions later? Especially when the answer would have been, "Well, they were Nazis." I would personally expect their exoneration! They would have fought against domestic terrorism! "There were so many of them! That would have been a strategical nightmare!" Oh, really? I didn't see our law enforcement have that issue in the 1960's against African-Americans when all they were doing was fighting for equality...

One of the overarching problems our society has is that every time an officer kills any person of color that garners national attention, whether right, wrong, or indifferent, the country shifts just a little. Some people wonder whether the police should be able to use force. Some people believe that the person who was killed deserved it. And some people begin to conspire an uprising. Wiser minds understand that the election-into-office of President Trump has not helped silence voices that should not be heard, as well. In interviews leading up to Trump's election to presidency, he made his indifference clear when he did not immediately and sternly denounce David Duke after being asked if he would accept the former KKK leader's endorsement. And that kind of clear indifference can be empowering. Many white supremacists watched Trump closely following the rally in Charlottesville, and many wrote out messages on social media platforms of how Trump didn't answer questions under definite terms. Whether Trump means to do this or not is irrelevant. The fact is the indifference, or lack of forthright opposition towards the neo-nazi and white supremacist demonstrators sends positive messages to those hateful groups.

To go even further back for a moment: What if the Trayvon Martin incident wasn't just the lynch-pin for democratic/liberal uprising, but also the lynch-pin for a far-right/alt-right uprising? The night watchman was acquitted there--due to extremely bogus Stand Your Ground laws--and as previously stated, I understand that the Michael Brown case garners a lot of grey areas, but since officer Wilson's acquittal we've been seeing more and more of the same under much tighter black and white situations. From the liberal point of view, these acquittals tell us that there's a clear issue with the justice system. Perhaps far worse than we previously suspected. But to the Alt-Right movement, they see something else. They see similar minds. They see that the white man can get away with anything if he's scared enough. And ideas start to form like: Oh, we (the white elite) can shoot black people and have little to no consequences? We (the white authoritative elite) can plant drugs for years and years and years specifically to incarcerate people of color and not get caught until body cams? Our justice system has made this neo-nazi/white supremacist uprising accessible and tolerable! There are European countries, i.e. Germany, Portugal, etc. where Nazism is completely illegal, let alone intolerable. Why hasn't our country followed suit? A rooting political interest? Votes? This is the depth of our sinking ship?

Ultimately, the problem is much bigger than a rally in Charlottesville. The problem is our entire country's justice system. And if that doesn't get fixed--through new grassroots movements and politicians, through more calls to our political constituents, through more petitions that call to injustice--then expect to see more Charlottesville incidents coming soon. We have no choice but to come together as a country to ensure that the Alt-Right/Neo-Nazi/Confederate ideals are doused before that fire spreads any further. If we don't band together sooner rather than later, the history of the Civil War can and will repeat itself.

- PatInTheHat

King Trumpet

Demonstrative

Old man

Needs

Another coddling after

Losing another

Damn marble

Jostling the media to

Open warfare on

Honest critics who
Never asked for his approval

Terrifying the masses through
Real-time tweets
Under the guile of
Misguided and misunderstood
Platitudinal toiletries

- PatInTheHat