Current Issues

in Qualitative Research

An Occasional Publication for Field Researchers

from a Variety of Disciplines

Volume 1, Number 9 November 2010

_____________________________________

The Intellectual Roots

of Grounded Theory

by Jane Gilgun

When Norman Denzin (2010) changes his mind about grounded theory (GT), you know something important has happened. More than 40 years ago, Denzin (1997) tried GT at the urging of Anselm Strauss. “Pretty soon, I had more GT than fieldnotes,” he said. He found that his efforts distanced him from the children in daycare who were the focus of his participant observations.

Denzin (2010) said, “I had failed at grounded theory.” Soon after he “became a critic of grounded theory” (p. 1). His failure did not affect his relationships with Strauss. For instance, he worked with Strauss and Alfred Lindesmith on several editions of Social Psychology (1999).

In 2010, Denzin came out as an enthusiastic promoter of a particular form of GT: collaborative, constructivist, and critical. Forty years earlier, during his first attempts to use GT, Denzin appears to have been caught up in the “trees” of GT; in other words, the technicalities of GT swamped him. He followed instructions that Strauss delivered in person about the constant comparative method, comparisons across field sites, and the search for emerging concepts, indicators of concepts, and links to theory (Denzin, 1997).

By 2010, Denzin saw that GT does not have to be about technicalities, but researchers can use it as an adaptable and open-ended approach to developing understandings of human situations. When researchers view GT this way, the goal is to listen, hear, and understand what others are saying and doing, in their own terms as much as possible. Its open-endedness permits researchers to adapt it to their own particular methodologies and conscious and unconscious biases. In short, there are many ways to do GT. Recently, Denzin adapted GT to serve his commitment to social justice issues in research that includes researcher collaborations with participants, the importance of local knowledge, and, once the research is completed, advocacy for social change.

The Roots of GT

This view of GT is consistent with its roots in the Chicago School of Sociology, where professors such as W.I. Thomas, Florian Znaniecki, & Robert Park urged their students to immerse themselves in the lives and situations of the persons whom they wished to study in order to develop deep understandings (verstehen) that resulted in descriptions of erlebnis, or lived experience. Many Chicago professors studied philosophers such as Kant, Dilthey, and Simmel when they were students at German universities (Bulmer, 1984; Gilgun, 1999, in press). These perspectives were embedded in their views about how to do research.

Robert Park’s famous words summarize this aspect of the Chicago School methodology. Park talked to his students about the necessity of "getting your hands dirty in research." He didn't stop here, however. He also said

But one more thing is needful: first hand observation. Go and sit in the lounges of the luxury hotels and on the doorsteps of the flophouses; sit on the Gold Coast settees and on the slum shakedowns; sit in the Orchestra Hall and in the Star and Garter Burlesk. In short, gentlemen [sic], go get the seat of your pants dirty" (McKinney, 1966, p. 71).

As a clear statement of immersion and the importance of multiple perspectives, this quote has few equals.

Theory development was also part of the Chicago School, although different professors had different perspectives on its centrality in research processes. Thomas and Znaniecki (1918-1920/1927), prominent in the Chicago School, believed that the purpose of science was to reach "generally applicable conclusions." This could be done through studying "each datum" "in its concrete particularity." Such strategies, from their view, is the basis of science. They emphasized induction, or the drawing general statements from careful analysis of particular situations (Gilgun, 1999). They said

The original subject matter of every science is constituted by particular data existing in a certain place, at a certain time, in certain special conditions, and it is the very task of science to reach, by a proper analysis of these data, generally applicable conclusions. And the degree of reliability of these general conclusions is directly dependent on the carefulness with which each datum has been studied in its concrete particularity (p. 1191).

This is no less true for the study of the individual who must be understood "in connection with his [sic] particular social milieu before we try to find in him [sic] features of a general human interest" (Thomas & Znaniecki, 1927, Vol. 2. p. 1911). Although, as the above excerpt suggests, they valued scientific generalization, they stated that they do not consider their work as giving "any definitive and universally valid sociological truths" (pp, 340-341). Rather, their work is suggestive and prepares the ground for further research.

These are early statements about the importance of theory development through building upon concrete particularities, which today we call case studies. These statements also show connections to the ideas of Strauss and colleagues (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Glaser, 1978, 1992; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss, 1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1998) who advise researchers to connect concepts to particularities in their efforts to construct grounded theories.

Although there were variations among researchers, Chicago faculty also had a commitment to social reform (Bulmer, 1984; Deegan, 1990; Gilgun, 1999). John Dewey, for example, set up a series of laboratory elementary schools, where he could try out the ideas being developed in the philosophy department as well as develop new ideas based on his interactions with of observations of teachers, students, and other personnel involved in the schools (Bulmer, 1984).

Jane Addams linked poverty and exploitation of workers with oppressive social and economic conditions, and she was a key figure in such reform movements as standards for occupational safety, the establishment of unions and the support of strikes, and various federal legislation on child labor and family social welfare (Bulmer, 1984; Deegan, 1990).

Robert Park and others studied social problems for the purposes of reform, but believed that an educated public would bring about social change. They did not directly advocate for change as did Addams and others associated with the Chicago School (Bulmer, 1984).

Denzin’s commitment to social justice and his stance on advocacy, then, is consistent with the roots of GT. His view of GT as constructivist, emancipatory, and action-oriented research has deep intellectual roots.

What’s New?

What’s new about GT is the name and some of its explanations of procedures of qualitative analysis, such as theoretical sampling, theoretical sensitivity, and elaboration analysis. Unfortunately, Glaser, Strauss, and Corbin did not explore or explain the intellectual roots of GT. The brief discussions they had of the Chicago tradition typically were dismissive, such as disparaging negative case analysis while giving a superficial account of it (cf., Glaser & Strauss, 1967).

What Denzin now calls GT is a good old-fashioned Chicago School of Sociology methodology. Members of the Chicago School did not name this approach to research except to call it fieldwork.

Grounded theory is a suitable name, unless researchers are looking to describe experiences. Then they may call their research interpretive phenomenology, which is a descriptive approach to verstehen and erlebnis. (See Benner, 2002; Polkinghorne, l983). Even critical theory has some of its intellectual roots in these philosophies, consistent with Denzin’s current perspectives on critical GT.

50 Years of Confusion

If Norman Denzin can experience confusion about what GT is, it is not surprising that legions of other researchers have, too. From the beginning, Anslem Strauss and Barney Glaser (1967), the originators of GT, laid the groundwork for almost 50 years of subsequent confusion, as well, of course, of protecting and promoting a rich intellectual heritage of qualitative research (Gilgun, 1999, 2005).

On the one hand, GT as originally formulated was a set of procedures for generating theory through prolonged immersion in the field. They were responding to concerns that many sociologist had about “grand theories;” that is, theories that were abstract and disconnected from more concrete descriptions of human, social phenomena (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).

This was arm-chair theorizing that Robert Merton (1968), among others, wanted to redress through the concept of “middle-range theories.” In fact, Merton’s (1968) description of middle range theories sounds like descriptions of GT. This is what Merton said:

theories of the middle range…lie between the minor but necessary working hypotheses that evolve…in day-to-day research and the all-inclusive efforts to develop a unified theory (p. 39).

On the other hand, GT was a set of generic procedures that researchers could use on many different types of qualitative research. Even the subtitles of their main texts show the confusion. The original book, that Strauss and Glaser co-authored, is called The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. The most recent iteration, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (Corbin & Strauss, 2008), continues the tradition of confusion.

Examples of generic procedures abound. For example, group analysis of data, which they highly recommend, was part of earliest research efforts, including Booth’s studies of the London poor (Webb & Webb, 1932). Grounded theory has no claim to this procedure. Even theoretical sensitivity (Glaser, 1978) may not be original because it is similar to Blumer’s (1954/1969) notion of sensitizing concepts, which, like theoretical sensitivity, are concerned with researchers’ capacities to identify social processes and construct theoretical statements about them.

It has become a cliché that researchers are not really doing GT if they don’t come up with a theory (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007). Maybe so, but the originators of GT made claims that their procedures were for doing qualitative research in general. Many of the procedures the originators discussed are useful for generic qualitative research and not necessarily for theory development. Open, axial, and selective coding are generic coding procedures that are not limited to theory-building.

Bryant and Charmaz recognize this confusion. They distinguish between grounded theory as methodology (GTM) and grounded theory (GT) as a product that is theory. They and several authors of chapters in their edited volume attempt to clarify the confusions that have arisen from Strauss’ and colleagues’ mixing of grounded theory as generic procedures and grounded theory as a product. They discussed such terms as “grounded,” “data,” “induction,” ”deduction,” “abduction,” “theoretical sensitivity,” and how to do some of the tasks associated with grounded theory, such as group analysis of data and when and how to include related research and theory.

The Split

As this discussions shows, Strauss, Glaser, and Corbin split off a part of the Chicago School legacy to emphasize theory development. They also made original and enduring contributions to qualitative analysis. Important, too, they kept a significant research tradition alive—this is, the open-ended, flexible approach to understanding of human phenomena.

Other researchers besides Denzin rejected GT and aligned themselves with the interpretive research. One of Strauss’s own students, Patricia Benner (1992), is one of them. Benner developed a form of interpretive phenomenology, which she taught to generations of students at the University of California, San Francisco, the same institution where Strauss, Glaser, & Corbin also taught for many years.

Benner's interpretive phenomenology seeks to convey lived experience and what it means to be human, presented in straightforward categories and theoretical statements that are inductively derived. She sees interpretive phenomenology as a scholarly discipline that provides perspectives that can promote understanding of everyday practices and meanings. As a professor of nursing, Benner, like Denzin, is within the Chicago tradition of research to be used to promote the social good.

Discussion

The spirit of GT is open-ended and flexible, a form of research that seeks to understand individuals involved in social interactions of various types within contexts that range from the micro to the macro. Which aspects of contexts researchers chose to address depend upon a variety of factors, but primarily their own biases and perspectives.

Thirty years after his initial failure, Denzin has come back to grounded theory with a deeper understanding of its spirit. He now promotes reformist, interpretive grounded theory. Benner has spent about 30 years doing interpretive phenomenological research, partially in reaction to the distancing she too experienced when she tried to do grounded theory in the mode that Strauss and colleagues promoted (Gilgun, 1999).

Strauss and colleagues seized upon a significant idea and promoted it through many iterations. Their efforts, however, were imperfect. Researchers have spent and will continue to spend time and effort figuring out what they meant and forging their own paths. Strauss encouraged researchers to do this. In his writing, he advised other researchers to be creative, to decide what they want from their research, and to stick with it no matter what others may do to undermine them (Strauss, 1991). As prescriptive as the originators of GT appear to be, Strauss remained until the end a researcher and methodologist within the style of the Chicago School: flexible, open-minded, and committed to the social good.

About the Author

Jane F. Gilgun, Ph.D., LICSW is a professor, School of Social Work, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA. See Professor Gilgun’s other articles, children’s stories, & books on Amazon Kindle, iBooks, & scribd.com.

About this Article

This is issue 9, vol. 1 of Current Issues in Qualitative Research, a periodical that is available through scribd.com & Amazon Kindle. Jane F. Gilgun, Ph.D., LICSW, is editor of this periodical. Individuals may submit short articles up to 1500 words long to Professor Gilgun at jgilgun@gmail.com.

Note: This article was first published in Report, a magazine of the National Council on Family Relations, 55.2, Summer 2010. Portions of this article appeared in Gilgun, Jane F. (1999). Methodological pluralism and qualitative family research. In Suzanne K. Steinmetz, Marvin B. Sussman, and Gary W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (2nd ed.) (pp. 219-261). New York: Plenum.

References

Benner, Patricia. (Ed.) (1994). Interpretive phenomenology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Booth, Charles (1903). Life and labour of the people in London. Final volume. London and New York: Macmillan.

Blumer, H. (1954/1969). What is wrong with social theory? In Herbert Blumer (1969/1986), Symbolic interactionism. (pp (pp. 140-152) Berkeley: University of California Press. Originally published in Vol. XIX in The American Sociological Review.

Bryant, Antony & Kathy Charmaz (Eds.) (2007). The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bulmer, M. (1984). The Chicago School of Sociology: Institutionalization, diversity, and the rise of sociological research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Corbin, Juliet & Anselm Strauss (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3^rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Deegan, M. J. (1990). Jane Addams and the men of the Chicago School, 1892-1918. New Brunswick, N. J.: Transaction.

Denzin, Norman K. (2010). Grounded and indigenous theories and the politics of pragmatism. Sociological Inquiry, 80(2), 286-312.

Denzin, Norman (1997). Coffee with Anselm. Qualitative Family Research 11(2), 1-4. Available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/27352636/Coffee-with-Anselm.

Gilgun, Jane F. (in press). Qualitative family research: Enduring themes and contemporary variations. In Gary F. Peterson & Kevin Bush (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (3rd ed.) (pp. 219-261). New York: Plenum.

Gilgun, Jane F. (2005). Qualitative research and family psychology. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(1), 40-50.

Gilgun, Jane F. (1999). Methodological pluralism and qualitative family research. In Suzanne K. Steinmetz, Marvin B. Sussman, and Gary W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (2nd ed.) (pp. 219-261). New York: Plenum.

Glaser, Barney. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, Barney. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Lindesmith, Alfred R., Anselm Strauss, & Norman K. Denzin (1999). Social psychology (8^th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Merton, Robert K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press.

Polkinghorne, Donald. (l983). Methodology for the human sciences: Systems of inquiry. Albany: State University of New York at Albany.

Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. 2005. "On Tricky Ground: Researching the Native in the Age of Uncertainty." Pp. 85–108 in Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed., edited by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Strauss, A. (1991). A personal history of the development of grounded theory. Qualitative Family Research, 5(2), 1-2.

Strauss, Anselm. 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Strauss, Anselm & Juliet Corbin (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Thomas, W. I. & Florian Znaniecki. (1918-1920/1927). The Polish peasant in Europe and America, Vol. 1-2. New York: Knopf. First published in 1918-1920

Webb, Sidney & Beatrice Webb. (l932). Methods of social study. London: Longman, Green.

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes witty people, nature, poetry, and other good things in life. She writes children's stories, articles, books for Amazon Kindle, iBooks, and scribd.com.

Five Little Cygnets
Cross the Bundoran Road
by Jane Gilgun


THIS PICTURE BOOK TELLS THE STORY of how a swan mother and father overcame obstacles to get their five newly hatched cygnets across the busy Bundoran Road to the salt marsh on the other side.

The photographs show the mother swan standing in the road shielding her babies from on-coming cars, the cygnets’ slow toddle across the road, the father swan’s efforts to get the babies through a wire fence, and finally the cygnets, mother, and father paddling away on the salt marsh under the watch of Benbulben, the table mountain that the poet W.B. Yeats immortalized.

The salt marsh is beside the Bundoran Road, outside of Mullaghmore, County Sligo, Ireland.

Description
A 15-page full-color picture book that shows the fuzzy swan babies in their newborn cuteness and the intelligence and care of their mother and father.

The beauty of County Sligo, Ireland, comes through in this beautiful picture book.



About the Author JANE GILGUN HAS SPENT many summers in County Sligo, Ireland, where this story takes place. Her grandfather Thomas Gilgun was born on a dairy farm in Meenkeeragh, County Leitirim. When Thomas was ten, his family left Meenkeeragh never to return. Jane Gilgun is a professor, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA.



Order from Amazon Kindle and lulu.com (http://www.lulu.com/content/5546892) and other on-line booksellers.


CONTACT INFORMATION

Jane Gilgun
Jane Gilgun Books
Email Jane Gilgun Books
612 9253569

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Service? What Service?

Civility in politics has taken a nosedive, and so has civility in everday life. This past week, I took a trip to Little Rock, Arkansas, from Minneapolis, for a conference. It started off all right-just two incidents that cost me money. The first happened on the ride to the airport. A ramp was shut for road upgrades that led to a detour and a $10 boost in cab fare.

The second was at the airport when a polite bag handler informed me she had to charge $15 to get my bag on the plane. I immediately wondered why she didn't weigh me and my bag and if I racked up less than the average weight of individual passengers and their bags then I shouldn't have to pay. But that wouldn't pass muster because such policies would discriminate against overweight people, even though such a strategy is consistent with charging for bags because of their weight.

At the hotel, I found someone also attending the conference to share a room with, but to cancel the reservation, I had to pay for a full night's stay even though I could not use the room. I did the calculation. I would not save a cent if I cancelled the room and moved in with someone else. No matter what, they would get their pound of flesh, even though I would never stay with them again and will tell everyone about them. The Peabody Hotel in Little Rock. Their duck parade is cute. Everyday they herd ducks to and from a small pool in the lobby.

Back at the Little Rock airport on my way home, I checked in to get my boarding pass. The kiosk demanded $15 for my bag before it would give me my boarding pass. I slid in my credit card that has worked all over Europe and the US. The machine would not take my card. It gave me the message, "See the attendant at the counter."

An attendant had been at the counter for the five minutes or so I tried to persuade the machine to give me my boarding pass. During that time, she had had no customers. I walked the few feet to the counter and said the machine told me to talk to the attendant. She said the attendant would be right with me. Wasn't she the attendant? I waited a few minutes. No other attendant showed up, and the attendant who was standing there ignored me.


I thought I should try another credit card. I walked the few feet back to the machine and slid it in. It worked. I got charged $15 and the machine printed my boarding pass and receipt. I pushed my bags back to the counter. I handed my driver's license and boarding pass to the attendant who had been standing there the whole time. She said, "That will be $25." I said, "I just paid $15. You want $25 more?" She said, "It costs $25 per bag." I said, "The machine charged me $15. I paid $15 in Minneapolis." She said, "Show me the receipt." I showed her the receipt.

She tapped on some keys on her computer. She said, "Ok." She put a luggage tag on my luggage and left it where I had placed it. I stood there waiting for her to put my luggage on a conveyer belt. She tapped a few keys. She must have noticed me standing there.


"You can bring your bag to be x-rayed," she said, as she motioned with her head to a machine about 20 feet away. I pushed my bag to the designated machine. The handlers said nothing when I said, "Hello." I sighed.

I got through security. As the wait person at the fast food joint, handed me my fries and blackened chicken sandwich, I asked for salt. The wait person pointed to a box containing hundreds of little packets. I looked through them. Every packet was stamped "pepper." I said to the wait person, "I looked. There isn't any salt in there." A man next to me said, "I saw one packet." The wait packet reached in and grabbed a packet and slammed it on the counter. Indeed it said salt. Then I saw a second salt packet among at least 200 peppers.

Her impatience annoyed me. I said in a loud and sarcastic voice, "Thank you very much for the excellent service." She smiled. She was genuinely pleased. She said, "You're welcome. Come again." She meant it.


Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

After Barack Obama, Who is Next?

It's over. Barack Obama is president of the United States. He has shown great promise during the campaign, and I grew to admire his intelligence, his focus, and his people skills. In so many ways, he stood in stark contrast to how John McCain presented himself. McCain became a kind of pit bull with no teeth, nipping and howling but with the bite of a gnat. Obama responded politely to these nips and returned to the point. no bite. McCain's supporters slimed Obama, and Obama responded with his side of the story and continued to stay focused.

My hope now is that the Obama administration can bring stability and civility to the United States and that Obama can fulfill his dream of being president of us all. Short-sighted politicians have exploited fears and differences that increased the divisions among us. In some ways, this could turn out okay if we honestly and calmly examine our fears of others and realize that we have much more in common than many politicians ever acknowledged and that many of our differences are to be celebrated. Our differences make us unique. When we have differences based on distortions and misrepresentations of other people, then this we must examine and change.

Obama has taken on a job that requires national and international good will and cooperation. He cannot do it alone, and he must reach out. People who are positioned to make things better must respond. This is truly a two way street and a joint venture.

As relieved as I am about Obama's election, I have lived long enough to know that even if his administration does catalyze reform and things change for the better, I question how long that will last. Many times in the history of this country and even in my lifetime, the quality of life in the US has risen and fallen. Even if things get better in the US during an Obama administration, how long will that last?

I spoke to Pam Monroe earlier today. Pam is a brilliant woman and a professor at Louisiana State University. She said that Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, has what it takes to be president. Jindal is a Republican, and now in my more mature years I see that the two-party system not only is essential but American votes want periodic change of party. If it is time for a Republican to be president in eight years, I hope it is Jindal or someone just like him. From what Pam said and from what I know of him, he would not only continue constructive policies, but he too would aspire to be president of all of us. He reminds me of Obama in his intelligence, skills, and vision.

It is not too early to think of who will be the next president. We must choose wisely. Our nation is fragile. Eight years of stability is not enough for a turn-around. We must have constructive policies for generations to come.










Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

McCain and Palin Use Words that Evoke Violence

The presidential campaign shows the power of words not only to define other people but to incit some people to violent words and possiblity to violent deeds. "Palling around with terrorists" is a favorite phrase of Sarah Palin. "Who is Barack Obama?" has become a catch phrase in the McCain presidential campaign.

These words trigger racist thoughts and emotions. Some people have shouted "kill him" at McCain and Palin rallies in response to these words.

McCain and Palin may not intend these extreme responses, but they are using
words that evoke them.

These candidates are indeed playing with fire as Representative John Lewis (D-GA) wrote in a letter to John McCain. These words are evoking a lynch mob mentality that puts many people in danger, most of all Barack Obama.

The events in the presidential campaign show how important discourse analysis is to public life. Discourse analysis involves an examination of the power of words to evoke images, thoughts, and feelings. Call someone a pervert, and this immediately reduces them to something non-human.

Call someone a terrorist and this evokes fear and for some people a desire to throw the first punch or set off the first bomb.

Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon assured southern voters that they would respect "states rights." This is code for stating that they would not enforce civil rights legislation if elected. These two politicians won the votes of Southerners who feared civil rights for blacks.

"Uppity" is term for blacks who are rising about their "station," meaning they are well-dressed, arrticulate, and educated. They may have nicer houses and cars than many whites. Calling them "uppity" is a way of evoking hostilty to African-Americans of accomplishment. It is no coincidence that many who politic for McCain and Palin are calling Barach Obama uppity, in addition to linking him to terrorists.

Words can be weapons of destruction when they are linked to shared meanings that lead to resentment, race-based mistrust, and violence.


Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

New Book on Sarah Palin: A Voter's Guide

Sue Katz, author of Thanks but No Thanks: The Voter's Guide to Sarah Palin wants people to know about her book. This is what she said.

I wrote my new book Thanks But No Thanks: The Voter's Guide to Sarah Palin in 28 very intense days and all-nighters. It all began when a small indie publisher Harvard Perspectives Press saw my blogs on Sarah Palin from the day of her selection. Within days I had a contract and was buried in this project.

Now that Palin has passed the “debate threshold,” it’s essential to cut through the mythologies in order to understand what she believes and what she has actually done in her short political life. We don’t have the “luxury” anymore of focusing on her wacky syntax and flirtatious winks. I believe that no matter what happens in November, Sarah Palin is going to be the leader of the Republican Party for some time to come.

There’s been quite a buzz since the paperback became available. It even hit Number One out of 183,000 among the Kindle books (Amazon’s electronic reader), where it was first released. Susie Bright said this about the me and the book: 'Sue Katz is just the she-bear to wrestle Sarah Palin's image back down to earth. Forget the myth about the GOP's latest superstar--Katz will show the real motivations behind Palin and where she comes from.'



Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me. Take a look at my books at stores.lulu.com/jgilgun, Amazon Kindle, and other on-line booksellers. Two are free downloads on lulu.

McCain Exploits Parents' Fears About Sex Education in the Schools

John McCain is exploiting parents' fears about sex education in the schools. His ads claim that Barack Obama wants kindergarteners to learn about sex before they learn to read.

Obama wants no such thing. What he does want is to give kindergareten students information about good, bad, and secret sexual touches.

Who can possibily be against protecting children from sexual abuse?

McCain ignores the fact that children are learning about sexuality continually, from birth on. It is up to parents and those who are with children several hours a day to help children understand sexuality.

Sex Education in Schools is Controversial

McCain knows parents have fears about sex education in the schools. He is exploiting those fears.

Some parents are for school sex education. Some are against. Still others want to examine the curriculum to make sure it provides information about values, feelings, appropriate and inappropriate behaviors, anatomy, and physiology.

Begin in Preschool

When the program is solid, sex education can begin in preschool, with basic information that matches children's curiosity and developmental level, such as where children come from and the bodily differences and similarities between boys and sex. Sexual terminology could also be part of the teaching.

Parents as Partners

It would be ideal for parents to be part of the planning. Parents might even do the formal teaching.

As children become older, the information that schools provide, with parents' input, would continue to match their developmental level. For example, nine year-olds are often fascinated by sexual terms. A brief session on sexual terms and what they mean would be helpful at that age. Children may use sexual terms to bully and tease others.

Bullying

A brief session on these "bullying" terms that include what the terms mean and how the terms hurt other people would provide children with guidelines. This also will help make the classroom and the school grounds more safe for children. "Faggot," "whore," and "lessie" are terms that some children use to hurt and exclude others.

It's Not Okay to Hurt Others

By the eighth grade children need much guidance about sexual feelings. They also are ready to learn about which sexually behaviors are appropriate and which are not. Many children this age do not realize that grabbing butt, or genitals is not funny and that it hurts to be hurts to be the target of such behaviors. Many children will stop these behaviors when they realize this is inappropriate. If children continue, then the classroom teacher can refer them to the school social worker.

Honesty

Children this age and older benefit greatly when they have formal instruction about sexual respect and honesty. For example, it is not okay to tell someone you love them just so you can be sexual with them. It is not okay to touch someone sexually or try to have sex with them just because they have a reputation for being "easy."

Myths About Sex

By high school, children have learned a lot of myths about sex. Boys for example may believe that they have to prove their masculinity by being sexual with as many girls as possible. Some resort to tricks and manipulation just so they can tell their male friends about their sexual conquests.

Girls may be desperate to have a boyfriend and may become sexual before they are ready and before they know if the boy is just using them. Girls and boys need to know the difference between sex as commitment and love and sex as a means of getting pleasure or showing you are a grown-up.

Summary

Sexuality is an important part of life. Children require both formal and informal education about sexuality. The best situation is when schools partner with parents to develop humane and comprehensive programs. These programs would include formal instruction every school year for about four hours a year and much informal guidance about appropriate and inappropriate sexual behaviors.


Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun, Ph.D., who is a professor, School of Social Work, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA. This blog is a way for me to connect with people who like to talk about ideas and connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Obama is Right and McCain is Wrong About Sex Education

John McCain has sunk to a new low when he degrades the importance of children's sex education. Barack Obama is right in advocating for healthy sex education.

Parents who educate their children sexually give them a life-long gift. When parents avoid talking about sex with their children or dismiss their questions and concerns, children are left on their own.

Information about sex that is available to them through peers, observation, movies, and the internet is distorted and harmful. It is up to parents to give children correct information.

Fostering children's healthy sexual development takes time and effort. Parents may have to deal with their own discomfort. The price for avoiding sexual topics is high. Children are left on their own to interpret the confusing and often destructive messages that they get from peers, the mass media, and the internet.

Parents are and should be concerned about what their children are learning. Often their sources of information about sexuality are distorted and even frightening. Children may get the wrong idea about sex. If they don't learn otherwise, they may act in ways that hurts them and other people. It is up to parents to give children correct information.

Talking to children about sexuality can open up many channels of communication. A young boy said to his mother, “If I can talk to you about sex, I can talk to you about anything.”

Start Early

Parents would do best to start sex education early. Children are being educated informally through their everyday experiences. Sex education starts in infancy. For example, when parents teach very young children the names of various body parts, they can teach them correct terms, such as vagina, vulva, penis, anus, buttocks, and breasts. They can also use “pet” and family names for sexual body parts, but knowledge of the more formal terms is important, too.

Pet names are part of family lore and normalize sexual body parts. However, when children go to the doctors or if they have problems with others about sexuality, it is important that they can use terms that others understand.

Healthy sex education helps prevent child sexual abuse. A child who has had a good sex education is more likely to communicate clearly and without shame that someone has violated them sexually.

Sexual Touching

Infants and toddlers often touch their sexual body parts and may touch the sexual body parts of other children. Parents have important roles to play in helping children know the difference between public and private sexual behaviors and appropriate and inappropriate behaviors.

Parents can instruct children that it is okay to masturbate, but that is a private activity not done in front of others. The places to masturbate or touch their sexual body parts are the privacy of their bedrooms or in the shower.

Sexual Respect

Parents have an important task of teaching children to respect the personal space and the sexual body parts of others. A no touching rule can be taught. “Please do not touch others on their sexual body parts.” “Keep your hands to yourself.” “If someone touches your sexual body parts, please tell me.” These the kinds of guidelines that parents can provide children so that children are safe and are safe to be around.

Simple Explanations Satisfy Curiosity

Preschoolers have questions about where babies come from. Simple explanations satisfy their curiosity. Questions about the origins of babies are intriguing to children, and they are delighted to find out the answers.

Sophisticated Information

As children get older, the kinds of information they require gets more sophisticated, such as what kinds of behaviors are appropriate at what ages. For example, when is kissing okay? Necking? Petting? How can you tell if he or she loves you? What to do if someone pressures you to have sex?

What if you like that person or think you are in love? These are difficult topics to broach with children and teens. Parents have a responsibility to help children develop into responsible and responsive human beings who celebrate their sexuality but who also do not exploit others or do not know how to stop others from exploiting them.

No Excuses

Children understand and appreciate parents' efforts. Embarrassment is no excuse for parents not to educate children sexually. Some parents avoid and dismiss children's concerns and questions. That hurts children's developing sexuality could lead to cut-offs in parent-child communication.

There are a lot of helpful books, dvds, and websites that can help parents talk to their children about sexuality. It's important for parents to push through their discomfort for the sake of their children.

Summary

Fostering children's healthy sexual development is a life-long gift that parents can give their children. It takes time and effort. Parents have to deal with their own embarrassment. The price for avoiding sexual topics is high. Children are left on their own to interpret the confusing and often destructive messages that they get from peers, the mass media, and the internet. Remember the boy who said, “If I can talk to you about sex, I can talk to you about anything.”



Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun, Ph.D., who is a professor, School of Social Work, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. This blog is a way for me to connect with people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Children's Descriptions of Child Sexual Abuse and Perpetrators

Children can provide vivid descriptions of what happens during sexual abuse. These descriptions bring to life the power differences between adults and children. Each incident is unique.

In their own words, children show how little and powerless they felt when in the presence of adults and older people who wanted to sexually abuse them. They felt compelled to obey and were fearful of consequences if they did not.

Randy, ten, described the teenage babysitter named Hank who had abused her three years before. She still sees him because he lives in the neighborhood. She said

I mean, he’s a super gross-out. He has long hair and sort of a beard, too, like an ape. He doesn’t have any class or anything. He looks like he probably drools all the time. He’s a gag. He’s a gross barf-out.

Randy said she could never forget what Hank did because “I was scared. That guy was really tall. He was scary looking.” Hank assaulted Randy twice. She said

The first day he did the thing in the bathroom with me, and the second day he pulled down my pants and kissed me on the fanny. He’s really sick.

She described how he got her into the bathroom.

He had this puppet. He had it say, ‘Go into the bathroom.’ So I did. I don’t know how he got there before me.

Hank had hidden behind the shower curtain. When he stepped out from behind it, Randy said, “I almost had a heart attack. I was sitting on the toilet.” Hank made no attempt to persuade Randy to cooperate. As he stepped from behind the shower curtain, he said, “Shhh. Don’t say anything.”

Then, as described earlier, he sexually assaulted her. Randy said “he dripped something” out of his penis. She also said she only had her shirt on. Randy protested: “I asked him what he was doing. I said, ‘Get out of here.’ He said, ‘Don’t you dare scream.’”

She had no idea what he was doing. She said, “I was scared.” Randy told her mother right away. The mother phoned the police, and the boy was charged with sexual assault and court-ordered into adolescent sex offender treatment.

Randy was not able to explain why she went into the bathroom when he told her to. When asked if she would have obeyed a six year-who told her to go into the bathroom, she said, “No,” as if the answer were self-evident.

Randy was in the gifted program at school, as was Olivia who was much clearer about why she obeyed the man who molested her. Olivia is the child who thought there were laws about adults and children that children had to obey. She said that meant “Someone older than me I had to obey them.”

She had several other reasons why she did not actively resist and tell her mother. Some of these reasons were mentioned earlier. The abuser told her that if she told anyone he would have to go to jail and that would make his wife unhappy. Her asked her, “You don’t want to make my wife unhappy, do you?”

Olivia gave other reasons that had to do with fear, self-sacrifice, and confusion.

I was scared. I didn’t know what to do. He was doing this, and I didn’t want him to do it. At that stage, I didn’t say ‘no’ to people. I always knew there was somebody who was worse off than I was. He played on that.

He also told her, “Doing this make me feel good. You like to make people feel good, don’t you?” She did, of course. Olivia had some fear about what he would do to her if she resisted, even though she believed he liked her. This is what she said.

He did like me. He was probably senile. I did what he wanted. I felt he would do something to me. I didn’t know why. I didn’t know what. I guess I didn’t understand.

The sexual abuse consisted of masturbation and oral sex.

I used to rub his penis outside his pants. I did it right on his front porch. Sometimes he put his hands in my pants and rubbed me. He made me put his penis in my mouth. He did it a lot of times. I didn’t like that.

Olivia thought her mother used to see her with the man on his front porch, “but my mother never said anything to me.” She was too young and too naïve to know what their behaviors meant, except that she did not like them. For two and a half years, whenever this man called her over, she went. One day, she was playing with a girlfriend. When the man called her over, she and her girlfriend went. The man took the two girls into his living room. Olivia said

He had us sit down, and he put his hands in my pants. He said to my friend, ‘Come on over. It feels nice.’ My friend ran out the door.

She talked to her friend about the incident.

I said I was sorry. I knew what was going to happen, and it did. I was scared to say anything to her.

Her friend gave her an idea of what to do:

The next time he started it. I cried and told him I didn’t want to do it. He didn’t do it again.

Soon afterward, she and her family moved from the neighborhood. She visited the man and his wife several ties with her mother. When the man died, she told her mother about the sexual abuse. She said

I figured that he had died. He couldn’t go to jail if I told. I wouldn’t make his wife unhappy if I told my mother.

Her mother was shocked. This man had been a father figure to her for ten years. She arranged for professional help for Olivia, for herself, and for the rest of the family.

Many incidents of sexual abuse do not involve physical violence, but some do. For example, some children witness physical abuse of their mothers. When their fathers begin to touch them sexually, they are afraid to resist. Alberta was eleven when he father first sexually abused her. He told her to take her clothes off. She said

I don’t know why I just didn’t leave. The idea didn’t occur to me….My mother tried to stop him. She got between us. What could she do? He just pushed her away and beat her up.

Her father told her that what he was doing to her was “an everyday thing. People do it every day.” He tried to have intercourse with her that first time. She said

I felt sick to my stomach. I didn’t t want him to do it. I wanted him to stop. I hated it.

She did not tell him to stop because “I would get hit with a belt. So I did what he said every time.” While he was abusing her, her father told her

I was jealous of my mother. He said I wanted to have sex with him the way my mother did, but I wasn’t jealous of that. I didn’t even think of it.

Adults can be helpful to children who have been sexually abused if they understand that each child’s experience is unique. Adults must, however, be ready for anything. What children say can be surprising and even shocking. The stories in this book can prepare adults to be open and receptive to whatever children have to say.

Perpetrators Have Sole Responsibility

Perpetrators have sole responsibility for child sexual abuse. Typically, they are older, stronger, and can overcome the children’s resistance through their physical strength, authority, and superior knowledge and experience. They may lie, intimidate, and manipulate children.

Some children have been sexualized by being sexually abused. They may attempt to touch the genitals of others or rub their own genitals against other people. Some teens and adults think these children want to be sexual and are happy to be sexual with the children. If children behave this way, it is the adult’s—and teen’s—job to teach the child appropriate sexual behaviors, not take advantage of children. Other children can be taught to back away from peers’ sexualized behaviors.


Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

On Being a Shit on YouTube

Think you're getting away with something? Think again. There's a new book out that exposes cover-ups. It's called On Being a Shit. You can hear all about it on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SPiGEIO9MA
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHD6e-zsKwQ&feature=related

Who ever thought there were that many cover-ups? Jane Gilgun identifies at least 30 like humor, blaming others, pretense of innnocence, self-righteousness, digging at someone's secret fears.

As more people read this book and wise up, your time is limited to get away with shit. Do it now before the book becomes a best seller. You can learn about it on YouTube or you can buy the book at Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Kindle, lulu (http://www.lulu.com/content/1151441) and hundreds of other on-line booksellers.


Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Read Free or Buy Unkind Deeds and Cover-Ups in Everyday Life

On Being a Shit: Unkind Deeds and Cover-Ups in Everyday Life

go to http://www.lulu.com/content/1151441 to read free or to buy for put-upon friends and relatives. Also on Amazon Kindle, Amazon.com, and other on-line book sellers.

A humorous look at a serious topic!

Read this book and you will dethrone the next person who dumps on you. For those who aspire to be shits, this book is a step-by-step guide.

Readers say:

“There’s nothing ‘girly’ about this book!”

“No one's ever written about this topic before."

“We all live with shits. Heck, I live with one—being one myself.”

“It’s smart, provocative, and I’ll never take that phrase for granted again.”


An excerpt from the book

Cara said to her lover Nick when she found out he had been seeing another woman, “What do you want? A harem?” An impish look appeared on Nick’s face, and he said, “Two women? That’s not much of a harem.” Cara laughed, tickled by the charm that endeared Nick to her. With her laugh, Cara’s tension lifted, and they talked about other things.

Nick had finessed Cara in an elegant, tailor-made way. His involvement with another woman had hurt Cara, and he covered up through humor. He had been with Cara long enough to know that a humorous response would distract her and lift her mood. Cara cooperated. She enabled Nick to be a shit.


JANE GILGUN is a professor, School of Social Work, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. She based the theory of being a shit on years of research, professional experience, and personal observations. With Alankaar Sharma, she has published Everything You’ve Wanted to Know About Child Sexual Abuse, or Maybe You Didn’t. This book will be available soon at http://www.lulu.com/content/1823038and other on-line book sellers. She has also written short literary pieces that are available at Amazon.com/shorts.

Clinton-Obama and Who Said What

Effective presidents and charismatic leaders get things done when they work as a team. Dr. Martin Luther King changed the course of American history and President Lyndon B. Johnson put those changes into law. Dr. King was a visionary. President Johnson knew how to get legislation enacted. As a team, these two men shared a belief in human equality. They changed human rights in the United States forever.

What else is there to say?







Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Hillary Rodham Clinton for President

Hillary Rodham Clinton won in New Hampshire, and I hope she wins the Democratic nomination for president. She has the brains and the guts to be a great president. She understands domestic issues and international politics. She can stand up to the bullies of the world. She has had a lot of practice standing up to the bullies in the United States. Even the American public can now see through the smears that unscrupulous people have plastered on her.

Senator Clinton attracts hatred the way any high profile and powerful American woman would. Woman-hating in this country and world-wide is astronomical. It is so common that we fail to notice it and take it for granted. At last, many people in the United States are declaring that what Hillary has endured is unfair. Those who smear her have no decency.

Hillary is taking the heat for all women. She is a symbol and reality that women are competent and can hold their own with men. Many men and women want to keep men on the pedestal of power, privilege, and prestige. Hillary is saying, Whoa. I am a woman. I am a leader. I want to lead the United States back to its roots of freedom and justice for all. No more cover-ups of selfish destructive motives through talking about flags, patriotism, and terrorism.

She signals the challenge to the politics of fear and deceit that has damaged this country and many parts of the world.

John Edwards and Barack Obama would also make good presidents, but the time in now for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.





Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

People Read More when Writers Produce Attention-Grabbing Stuff

Reading is important, no doubt about it. People who read well earn more money than those who do not, are more active in civic affairs, and are able to take many factors into account before they act. Yet, many people in the U.S. are reading less, according to a new report put out by the National Endowment for the Arts, an agency of the federal government.

What to do? Make all forms of written material as interesting as YouTube or television advertisements. People are reading. They are reading e-mail, MySpace, websites, graphic novels, and all kinds of other interesting stuff.

By their behaviors, today’s readers are telling those who write that they have to do better. Be interesting. Be short. Be funny. Use graphics. Use sounds. Make reading fun. Match reading to the incredible imaginations that so many people have.

The decline in reading is a challenge to writers. Write better stuff. It really is that simple.

A case in point: Children nine and younger have great reading scores. Why? Because author who write for children write TO children. They write what children want to read. The stories are short and fun. They appeal to children’s imaginations. They have great graphics. Many appeal to multiple senses—sound, smell, taste. Many have DVDS that go along with children’s books.

If children’s writers can do it, we all can. It’s win-win.

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Elected Officials Defy Law, but Don't Pee Outside

I’m worried. The Bush administration defies the law. The California governor defies the law. If elected officials do not obey the law, what’s next? Lawlessness? I have visions of armed men taking over governorships, tanks rolling down Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C., and the next elected president with a gun against her temple being escorted out of the Oval Office because she did something someone else did not like.

I am afraid the United States will descend into chaos, where anyone, including those elected to powerful public office, will do whatever they please regardless of the law. Citizens who break the law are subject to arrest. What about elected officials?

How is it that the president of the United States can order the abduction and torture of citizens of other countries and get away with it? How can the governor of California enforce a law whose implementation the California Supreme Court has ordered to be stayed?

How is it that a man who was arrested for urinating under a bridge 22 years ago is a registered sex offender and is arrested under order of the governor of California? Yes, that is what happened. This man is a registered sex offender because he peed outside 22 years ago and was arrested this week for not letting police know where he lives.

There’s something rotten in the United States.

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Sexual Play and Child Sexual Abuse

Sexual play between age peers is not sexual abuse. Curiosity about sexual body parts is developmentally appropriate, especially in young and school-age children. Sexual acts are play when spontaneous and brief, not pre-planned, and the children are about the same size and similar in physical strength and have similar understandings of the meanings of their behaviors and the consequences if adults find them in states of undress and engaged in activities that involve sexual body parts.

Activities that involve sexual body parts may not be sexual at all for children. They may experience a simple curiosity that arouse no other feelings but surprise and the satisfaction of curiosity or mild tingles that are pleasurable but do not move beyond that. Some children are at first shocked and a bit disgusted when they see the body parts of other children or learn about sexual intercourse. They may think that there own genitals are not that attractive either.

Children’s sexual development begins in the uterus and continues as the mature into teenagers and adults. Boy fetuses have erections and girl fetuses have genital swelling. Infants enjoy touching their genitals. Children begin asking questions about body parts and where babies come from at early ages. Little boys may be fascinated when they get erections.

Children learn which behaviors are appropriate and inappropriate from the adults in their lives. When children masturbate in public, for example, parents teach children to masturbate in private and tell them that such behaviors are private. If children grab other children’s sexual body parts, parents teach them not to do this under any circumstances. If such behaviors persist after parents and/or other adults give children guidelines about these behaviors, consultation with knowledgeable professionals is called for.

Sexuality is a natural part of being alive. Children’s understanding of sexuality depends upon children’s developmental levels and on how other people communicate about sex. When guided by adults who provide age-appropriate information and direction and who behave in sexually appropriate ways themselves, children develop sexually healthy and responsible behaviors and attitudes.

Healthy sexual development includes age-appropriate information about the various aspects of human sexuality, such as the names of sexual body parts starting when children are infants, appropriate and inappropriate behaviors, the various feelings and emotions connected with sexuality, and the many reasons people eventually want to engage in sexual touching and sexual intimacy.

Children whose parents have fostered healthy sexual development may be better prepared to deal with attempts others may make to sexually abuse them. For certain, if someone does abuse them, they are much more likely to tell someone right away than children who do not understand the difference between health and unhealthy sexual behaviors.

This is an excerpt from Everything You Were Afraid to Ask About Child Sexual Abuse by Jane Gilgun & AlanKaar Sharma available soon as a e-book or a book-on-demand.

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Karl Rove Scores Big in the Game of Being a Shit

Karl Rove has done it again—scored big in the game of being a shit. In three TV appearances on Sunday morning, Rove covered up his unkind deeds like the master he is. Cover-ups are of several different types. Rove used most of them.

Why are you picking on me?

Rove is the pick-on-other-people in-chief. Now he's complaining that the press is after him like Ahab after Moby Dick.

That’s not me while implying that it really is him

Rove declared in disgust that the press has made a myth out of him. This genius of the spoken word cloaks himself in one of the great myths and archetypes of all time when he says he is Moby Dick and the press is Ahab.

Someone else is responsible

Asked about his awful hip-hop performance at a White House Correspondents’ Dinner in March, Rove said, “They dragged me up there….I’ve got no choice…I can play along and show them that I’m a good sport.”

Yes, Karl. You have no will of your own. Who, by the way, is “they” and “them?”

Rove said he had nothing to do with the outing of Valerie Wilson, the CIA agent, when the world knows he was at the center of it.

Everyone shares the blame

When asked if he has any responsibility in the weakening of the Republican Party, he answered that every Republican ought to feel responsible.

Talk about pointing the finger of blame as a way to shift the rightful blame from him to others. He is a master blame-shifter.

The Constitution ties his hands

Rove hid behind the Constitution as an explanation as to why he did not comply with a Congressional subpoena in hearings on the firings of several non-partisan U.S. Attorneys.

Name calling

Rove called reporters “agents of Congress” when they asked him about his role in the firings. This makes Congress appear to be a gang of outlaws.

This is genius-level rhetoric, masterful use of innuendo to shift attention and blame from him to others. Does he have to think about these responses or do they arise spontaneously in his mind?

Obeying orders

When asked why he subjected himself to so many question and answer shows in one day, he said, “Somebody else made the decision for me. I’m just doing what I was instructed to do.”

Rove is a master, a genius. Sit at his feet and you too may attain the Mount Olympus of being a shit.

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Bridge Collapse in Minneapolis

How in the name that all is that good can a bridge collapse in the enlightened city of Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA? I live there. I know the values that most Minnesotans live by. This is a tragedy and a disgrace of national proportions.

I place the blame directly on George Bush who refuses to give the states money for upkeep of bridges and roads. I blame Tim Pawlenty, governor of Minnesota, who does not believe in allocating enough money to keep Minnesota bridges and roads safe. He and Bush are playing to an imaginary audience of greedy honchos who care about nobody but themselves.

Tunnel vision reigns. People like them do not see the bigger picture. Safe bridges, roads, families, and communities is what it is all about. It is not about making greedy people richer.

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.

Most Perpetrators of Child Sexual Abuse Were Not Sexually Abused

Research has shown that most perpetrators of child sexual abuse were not sexually abused in childhood. Since most perpetrators were not sexually abused, being sexually abused is not by itself a risk to become a perpetrator.

One of the most consistent negative factors in the lives of adult perpetrators are histories of physical and psychological abuse that, combined with other risks, are associated with being sexual abusers of children.

These other risks are emotional inexpressiveness, social isolation, sexualized family and peer cultures, a sense of entitlement to take what one wants regardless of consequences, and lack of empathy for others.

No one risk leads to the perpetration of child sexual abuse. Rather, each perpetrator has a combination of risks and few protective factors that help them to avoid being sexual abusers of children. A combination of risks and relatively few resources are linked to the perpetration of child sexual abuse.

Perpetrators of child sexual abuse want to abuse children sexually, and they take active pleasure in this perpetration. A few may give the appearance of having protective factors in place, but because they desire and actively seek sexual contact with children, they are out of touch with the meanings of their behaviors for the children, themselves, and their families and friends. At their core, they are as alienated from their deepest values and emotions as perpetrators who have more obvious signs of risks.

Mike’s life story is an example of a man who was not sexually, physically, or psychologically abused and neglected in childhood and who described a happy childhood. Despite this, he sexually abused his stepdaughter for several years, beginning when she was three. He also raped his wife many times.

The youngest child of five children and the only son of a working class, two-parent family, Mike was smart, handsome, and personable. His older sisters and his parents doted on him.

He went to church every week with his parents, and he liked going. His friends were other children from the church and from his neighborhood. His parents did not drink alcohol, and they socialized with other families. They were married for thirty-seven years. Mike father’s died at age seventy-five.


Mike spent a lot of time with his father who taught him how to repair cars, how to build houses, and how to care for the house and yard which Mike said was “immaculate.” Mike appeared to respect his father. He said

I learned a lot of stuff from him. A lot of it I didn’t use later on. He gave me a good example, but I chose not to follow it.

Mike described his father as always busy, always doing something for work or around the house and yard. “The only time he wasn’t working, he was sleeping,” he said.
Mike did not like to talk about his father who died when Mike was in his early twenties. He regretted that he had not gotten to know his father better. He said, “I still have a lot of pain about talking about him.”

Mike’s mother was a homemaker who occasionally worked part-time. She was an excellent cook and an organized homemaker. She and her husband were married for thirty-seven years. She never remarried and bought her own home in a neighborhood close to Mike and his family and to two daughters and their families.

Mike described a happy childhood, with much involvement with family, extended family such as grandparents, and people at church and in the neighborhood.

Mike said that he felt like he was an only child because his sisters all were married and out of the home by the time he was in his early teens. A sister six years older than him was like his second mother. She would take care of him when his mother was working.

Things changed for Mike when he was an early teen. He got into drugs and alcohol, no longer wanted to go to church, and began to disobey his parents. He dropped out of school and worked at low-paying jobs. In one job, he became angry at the boss and vandalized the workplace as revenge.

He said he abused his stepdaughter because he liked doing it. He began when she was about four, and the abuse ended when she was about eleven. His description of the abuse illustrates many of the points made earlier about what perpetrators say about child sexual abuse. This is what Mike said in his own words.

"I don’t think about why I did it too much. There's lot of different reasons why I did it. Number one was because I liked it. I liked the control and what I felt was intimacy or whatever. Her and I didn't have anybody else.

"It was like a challenge, too, to get her alone. That part was almost more exciting than actually having sex with her, setting everything up just to get her alone. It took a lot of my time and a lot of my energy to do that, a lot of preoccupation, a lot of planning involved in it.

"I had to think what time her mother gets home for sure. She worked part-time. So she got off different times. Knowing if I had to pick her up or if she is getting a ride some. So she may come walking in.

"Keeping June scared, more or less. What's going to happen to her if she tells. A lot of awareness of where the kids are. I always knew where they were at. I used a lot of verbal threats. Mom would leave or something.

"At the beginning I guess I used to think that it was good to do this. She was younger. She believed me then. When she started to resist, it turned into threats and manipulation with money. Or “You're grounded,” or “You're not going to get anything.” “You can't go there. You can't go here, if you don't do this for me.” That nobody would want her, stuff like that. I used a lot of shaming.

"So it went from caring, what I felt was caring, down to more stronger forcing, towards the last three or four years, actually. June was convenient. She was always there.

"There’s no stopping once, I started. There was no turning back after that. I just figured that I enjoyed it and why stop. Why tell anybody because I’d get thrown in prison then.

"The actual sex — I liked that. Then the control, being in control of her life completely was a thrill for me. I thought about it more than I thought about my wife. She occupied a lot of my time.

"I don’t think of people’s feelings. I still have a hard time with that. I’m pretty insensitive about other people. I’m really self-centered. It’s just selfish, sexual gratification and that’s all. That’s about all there is to it.

"She was a pretty girl--no question. I mean, other people say that, too. I looked at her at her other than just an object--also as a pretty girl. Then it would run in my head that she's not just a girl. She's mine and always will be. It would run in my head that she always will be mine.

"I eventually think I would have run off with her. I thought about that. I would someday.

"That's where a lot of pornography and stuff comes in with people like child molesting and stuff, that they control it controls their life so much that they finally get involved with child pornography and stuff like that, where they can manipulate the kids into doing things to make money for them. I think that was the road I was traveling.

"We’d talk about sex abuse all the time at work, stories on TV and all that stuff. We talked about that. Here I was doing the same thing. Anyway, I took a real hard line on it with him, that they weren’t fit to be alive, stuff like that. I was doing the same thing."

Mike’s mother and sisters stayed in close touch with him while he was in prison. All but one sister visited him regularly, at least twice a month, with phone calls and letters in between. One sister thought his sexual abuse of his stepdaughter had crossed a line, and she did not want to see him because of it.
He had no contact at all with June, the child he sexually abused. June’s mother divorced Mike and the judge ordered no-contact with this family.

Fiona Speaks is a pseudonym of Jane Gilgun who likes to laugh and talk. This blog is a way for me to connect with witty people who like to talk about ideas and how to connect with what's important. To do this, I want to examine and demystify the blocks I see to building connections and community with other people. Join me.