State of Shame

Source: jsonline.com (feat. 11/11 when Mr. Stoli* & I
represent 2 of the 7,048 cases in WI)

I received a positive COVID-19 test result a little while ago.  As of this writing, I am only experience a couple of very minor symptoms (knock on wood), and I am now quarantined and have alerted everyone who has come within my zone of monstrosity in the 72 hours prior to first showing any symptoms at all.  I've done, in other words, everything I'm supposed to as far as I know (thus far without a promised call from a contact tracer, although I know they're quite busy). In fact, I've done pretty much everything I am supposed to the whole time - stayed home, kept our bubble limited, worn a mask when I do go out - and still contracted it...  

I only got a test on Monday because we were told that afternoon that my dad had tested positive when he was admitted to the hospital that afternoon (for non-COVID reasons).  My symptoms didn't develop until the subsequent day Tue (11/10), and I immediately started putting the timeline/storyline together in my head:

1. I contracted COVID from Brooke who picked it up from Papa when we were there a month ago when Andy went to Omaha.
2. My dad, who I now suspect is in the midst of a case of Long Covid, has had it for at least 6 - 8 weeks, thus leading to some of his underlying problems of late. 

My mom has been working the phones since Monday, talking to anyone and everyone who has been in contact with them (again, they've been limited in their contact, but with a more old people approach of people occasionally dropping off baked goods or casseroles, etc.). Her experience in making these calls, and my own as well in sharing with people my test result, has been one of immediate concern (with a pinch of accidental self-concern in the cases where there might have been minimal contact wit the callee) and then interrogation of blame (where did you get it / did you give it to _____?). In fact in Clinton there seems to be social phenomenon going on of people expressing some surprise when they learn of a case, because, it seems, so many who get a positive test tend to keep it under wraps if they can. It's better, it seems, to avoid becoming known as a spreader than to, in fact, limit any possible spreading you've done. 

In addition to my positive test, I am also currently unemployed - another badge of cultural shame I am wearing at this moment. It's not surprising, given the fact that I have either been fired or asked to quit by this boss in each of the past four presidential election years, but it is a condition I have had recommended to me that I mask, lest it make me undesirable. And so, Seeger Enterprises, Inc. (SEI) was born in October 2020 to little fanfare. Although it's activities are quite varied, if you want a free stock, you can sign up for Robinhood using this link, and support SEI's investments arm while getting yourself some free money (no deposit required, you just have to link a bank account).

To be clear, I am not actually ashamed of either of these current status, but it has made me painfully aware of my underperforming in the vast game of Anti-Shame that we are requested to take part in. As an active job seeker, I spend an inordinate amount of time on LinkedIn these days, and it is appalling (at least meinetwegen).  I realize not every working person is living their Office Space endless nightmare, and yes... somepeoplereallyliketheirjobs... but the performative nature of people singing the praises of aspects of their workplaces or their companies achievements is gross. It has close parallels to the toxicity of Facebook's personal vacation posts, etc. and yes this is all well discoursed (a la The Social Dilemma etc.), but when it gets to (semi-)forced fawning over your workplace it's borderline Corporate Fascism territory.

We need to work to decouple shame from status, but the capitalist social fabric we are all born into today makes that very difficult. There is no shame in being sick or poor or unemployed; no shame in being anything, really. Shame should come from actions (or inactions) - I do not want to dismiss the redeeming societal qualities of shame. If you actively work to 'cut labor costs' in your work or industry (i.e. work to pay people less): you should be ashamed of yourself. If you knowingly (or suspectingly) promote false narratives (e.g. herd immunity, voter fraud, etc.), which will result in more folks in your community getting sick and dying, you should be ashamed of yourself. When you (inadvertently or intentionally) perpetrate an act of dehumanization (and honestly, I think we all can be guilty of this from time to time - with folks of differing political or cultural views on Twitter or service employees irl) small or large, you should be ashamed of yourself.  

But that's what's so great about shame, when properly administered. When it targets an action and not a status (or a being), even our own, we can learn from it and adjust our behaviors in future. The political chant of repeating "Shame! Shame! Shame!" at legislators (or any action-takers who need to be held to account) works because it is objects to the action and not the actor (we chanted this at them not because they were Republicans, but because they were working to take collective bargaining rights away from unions {which is, like, what unions do!}, or forcibly separating children from their parents because they were attempting to cross a border, or trying to take away health insurance protections for pre-existing conditions from our nations most vulnerable). If they simply cease the shameful action, and take on another course, their shaming could end.

That's it, do good, be better, that's the post...

* I've long followed Mr. Stoli's Twitter feed without ever knowing who it was that I was following. Not, I assume, someone I know personally, but a kindred Milwaukee spirit who shares many of the same views and interests and haunts. So similar, in some ways, that when we were diagnosed on the same day i briefly suspected that he actually was me, and my anonymous Twitter account (then I shamefully remembered that my anonymous Twitter account has only managed 17 followers to date, while my friend here hovers around 1,000) 

the era of the mini-pundit

So, i know i don't often wax (wane?) politico on this blog, but with a bit of inspiration from my new e-stalkee & a quick 4-minute segment on CNN this morning i have something to get off my chest...

Just before i left the house this morning CNN's "American Morning" was interviewing the youngest superDelegate for the 2008 Democratic Primary & a slightly hot, exceedingly severe College Republican... They were talking, purportedly (which i think is the snider way to say supposedly), about the "youth" vote & the "issues important for young people today"...

What they really showed, though, were a couple of prematurely 50-year-old Talking Heads using strict partyline talking points to "debate" Obama's help kids pay for school plan. First of all, the idea that the driving issue for 'young people' (which i'm starting to realize no longer really includes me) is how to pay for college is belittling & an oversimplification. This, of course, is not surprising for cable news (it's remarkable how little insight or information you can pack into 1 hour of cable news coverage), but it speaks to a larger issue i've been thinking about lately, namely old people.

The impetus for my discussion of this rampant problem is the crotchety senior citizens hired at Miller Park to walk through sections harrassing young people during poorly attended midweek games. Brooke & i had $6 nosebleeds (sponsored by Miller High Life - which, miller high life, if you'd like to sponsor this blog i'd be more than happy to sing your praises as often as necessary) and being a dead Wednesday nite (this is a subltle Miller plug) game, we found some better seats available on the Loge level. We sat down alongside a large contingent of other seat jumpers and made the classic seat jumper blunder of sitting a few rows back from the filled in seats (for those wishing to get better seats, the secret is 1) enter a section that is not currently being watched by old people & 2) choose seats that are in the row directly behind (or even better in front of) established sitters... They likely won't check tickets for large numbers of folks, but this system can still fail if - you're young-ish looking.

That's right, agial profiling is going on at Brewer's Games. I personally observed crotchety old people check tickets of several groups of youngFolks, but bypass an older couple of men in windbreakers who obviously didn't have tickets for that section (they were seated several rows behind the end of the sold tickets, but weren't checked because they were old).

Most disturbingly was the way we were addressed when the old man confronted us. He said "Sir, do you have tickets for this section?"

"No," i said, which momentarily confused him. I suspect he was waiting for a 'i can't find my ticket ploy', but he recovered and said "Do you have tickets on the Terrace Level, sir." His insinuation was that we clearly did not belong here, among the over-priced seats, but we clearly belonged 'up there'. Add this to our experience of a few nights prior when our Beer Pen seats were otherwise occupied and when we told the usher this she said, "aw, go find some other seats." (Admittedly this was later in a blowout, but the section, while having some empty seats, was significantly fuller than the Loge level seats we were occupying). I really wonder, though, if we'd been doddering old folks would we have gotten our seats...

This all points to, i think, a larger issue we're really facing, that of a true cultural divide between young & old. Walter Benjamin talks about this a lot in his early writing, the idea that the youth must revolt & drive social agenda, but the problem we have with American culture is that the youth pretty much has to rally behind an old person... No matter where you draw the line of 'old guy' & youth the average age of national leaders is telling... I'm not necessarily calling for a Logan's Run style abolition of old folks (i'd be finished in both the film & book versions), but there's something here and i'm not sure what it is.

Obviously, youth grow up & become older. For a while they're an 'in-between' stage, where i think i find myself now. Not sure i want to buy in totally to the Programme of american commerce/democracy (commocracy?), but also pretty sure that if i don't soon i will "be in trouble later"... Get your pension in order, workworkwork while you still can, maintain your health benefits (by never quitting your job or making sure you always have another one waiting) so you can stay healthy...
But what i wonder is, is there a way to maintain youth when you grow older. To continue to believe in the things you believed in before. Old white guys on the radio (i'm looking at you AM 620 - WTMJ in Milwaukee) will tell you that when you get older & "wiser" you realized you were confused when you were younger, that you just didn't realize how things worked, but what it really is is that you get scared by the Programme and then have to start telling everyone else to 'get with it' so you feel ok for joining up... (it's a lot like the housing market & how i tell everyone that it's really starting to come back & look good now that i own a house).

If we look at the art historical tradition of (??? early 1800/victorian/1600s? Art Historians help me out here) painting children as if they were miniature adults alongside this morning's CNN "youth minute" and even our entire educational system, which trains children, adolescents, and young adults to fill out forms - to complete strictly defined tasks, essentially to be middle-management we see that this Programme (yeah, i've taken a liking to that term) isn't what we want, isn't useful, and is infectious (spreading both in strength & geography). Perhaps the only solution is to turn the world's keys over to it's new drivers as soon as possible. It's better than being stuck behind a Cadillac that's had its left turn signal on for 15 miles and going 42 in a 55.