Some reflections on a Saturday morning.

Every now and then I reflect on my work career, and what it has been like/is like to be a woman in a mostly male-dominated profession (at least when I started out). When I started out in science, it was not unusual to find a preponderance of men in the top positions (professor, research leader, department leader, group leader), whereas the majority of women were research technicians, junior scientists, or assistant professors. Very few were department heads or group leaders. There are more women in science now, and more women in top positions, but that has been a gradual development, and the profession still struggles with the loss of women once they reach the critical points in their careers where they have to decide if they want to be research or group leaders. The demands on their time are intense, and it's often hard to combine that with family life. So that is one problem that I see still exists, almost forty years after I started out in science. The married women I knew who had top positions when I was starting out had husbands who chose less demanding professions, or both had help from nannies when raising their children. However it worked out, women struggled to balance it all, and they are still struggling. Even here in Norway, a lot of the recent surveys have concluded that women still hesitate to invest the time in top leader positions because of the inevitable conflicts with family life. I don't have an answer; I think there will always be a conflict, because it is a question of prioritizing. If we prioritize family life, then our work lives can suffer, and if we prioritize our work lives, our family lives can suffer. Finding the balance is not an easy task. I never had my own children, so I was never faced with that conflict. But of course I was faced with the challenge of not devoting all my waking hours to my work at the expense of my family life. Having a husband who works in the same profession and who understands the demands it makes on our time, has been a godsend. When we were struggling to build careers, we invested a lot of time in our work. I don't regret it, because I am sure that I would have done the same thing no matter what profession I chose. I was raised to work hard and do my best. That meant hard work and long hours in order to become good at something. And I am good at what I do.

The latter is something I think about often now as I approach retirement. Have I done the best job I could do? Have I been a good mentor and leader for the younger women and men coming after me? The answer to the first question is yes, I have done the best job I could do given the talents I have. I have become a good scientist, albeit not a great one, and that is fine with me. I found my niche and did my best. I can honestly say that. I've published nearly one hundred articles, have had the chance to lead a small team of researchers, managed to get funding to support my position until I was hired permanently by my hospital, and have mentored Master and PhD students. I have believed in myself even when the odds were against me. I did not give up on myself, and that is thanks to my early bosses. I had bosses early on (in New York) who pushed me and challenged me to take on new opportunities, some of which I feared. But I did. They saw potential in me and were not afraid to push me to do something with it. But they did it in a respectful way. When I moved to Norway, I confronted new challenges, but without the same level of personal interest from my bosses. They were more interested in their own careers than in mine. I have discovered that this was often the case in academic science (that I grew up with), which is highly competitive. If a senior researcher showed a professional interest in you, it mostly had to do with what you could do for them. The outcome in any case was that both won in a sense--the senior researcher got the necessary lab work done by others, but the junior researchers got publications that helped them in their own careers. So even if the latter felt like slaves at times, it often ended well once they moved up the ladder and started research groups of their own. That is the way it used to be well into the early 2000s. And then it all changed. Younger people no longer had the chance to start their own research groups; they were suddenly expected to work for a senior group leader until they were well into their late 40s/early 50s. A lot of young people simply cannot accept this and leave academia for greener pastures that give them the chances that my husband and I were given in the 1990s. We had an intellectual independence and freedom that is no longer encouraged; now it is expected that you work in a large research group for one senior research leader and that you simply accept your role passively. You are not encouraged to start your own research group, and the (natural) desire to do so is frowned upon--you are looked upon as a troublemaker if you go around stating that you would like more intellectual freedom and independence so that you can start your own research group. I do not support this new way of doing science; it does nothing but create frustration and disappointment in young people in their professional prime. But that's the way it is now. When I talk to young people, I tell them what it was like for my husband and me; I don't want them to think that it was always as restrictive and demotivating as it is now. But it doesn't always register, because young people often think that the present is the only thing that counts. We were like that too, I guess.

The answer to the second question is also yes, with reservations. I had to grow into the role of mentor, and I did make some mistakes early on, especially when a student was stubborn or narcissistic. Nevertheless, I think I have done the best job I could do under sometimes difficult circumstances. I have reflected upon the psychological costs involved in pursuing an academic scientific career. The daily assaults on your self confidence, your expertise, your way of treating students--are many. I realize that I have a healthy self confidence; if I think I am right, it is because I have reflected on a particular situation and come to a conclusion that reflects that investment of time and reflection. It will then be difficult to sway me. I operate using principles that I grew up with--I believe in fair play, respect, and justice, and I behave accordingly. I treat others as I would like to be treated. I have tried to encourage my students to think for themselves, to have their own ideas and opinions, to think creatively. I have tried to get women to stop feeling guilty for saying no when it is their right to do so. So many women still think that saying no, as in--I cannot do this or that for you right now, I have no time, or I have other priorities--is a wrong way to behave. It is not. In my experience, saying no is what gets you noticed (and I am not talking about saying no in a rude way to your boss or about being difficult for the sake of being difficult). Saying no prevents you from becoming someone else's doormat. Saying yes all the time may work out well for some people, but it does not work out well for women. Saying no when necessary may get you labeled as difficult, but that most women can live with, in my opinion, or should get used to living with. Because whatever profession you choose, there will come a time when saying no is what will get you noticed. Saying no says--I am doing the best job I can, and if you want me to do more, then you need to sit down with me and negotiate that. You need to negotiate a reciprocal relationship that is win-win for all, not just for the senior leaders. Women often fall back on the service aspect--serving others, and that is fine, but it is also about taking care of yourself and what you want. Women should not be doormats at work, nor at home, and a workplace culture that pushes women to aspire to being doormats is not a workplace you want to work in. Do you want to take on that extra project for no extra pay and no recognition, at the expense of your free time or your family time, just because your boss asks you to because he or she knows it will get done well if you do it rather than giving it to the shirker in the department? Do you want to be available 24/7 to a workplace that won't think twice about laying you off in times of budget crises?

The word 'professional' has taken on a new meaning for me now after many years in the workforce. I define it as behavior that involves doing the best job you can, in an expert way, without becoming too emotionally involved or too loyal to your workplace. It means being aware of your valuable skills at all junctures. It means visualizing how valuable you are to your present company but also to other workplaces. It means never forgetting that. It means standing up for yourself. It means being able to negotiate with senior leaders about how those skills are to be used. It means being rational, logical, objective, rather than emotional, illogical, and subjective. It means seeing both sides and keeping a cool head in situations where others might become irrational (playing it cool). It means remaining centered in yourself; it means not letting other people push you off balance. Women need to learn more of this, and to learn the value of their own worth. Women also need to give up the idea that they need to be ‘rescuers’. Where you would rush in to save a sinking project that is the result of someone else's negligence (too many women I know), you should hold back and let it sink. You should let the chips fall where they may. You should let the shirkers face the negative feedback; let them face being exposed for the shirkers they are. You should let the bullies and harassers sink and not make excuses for them. You should not defend the demotivators or try to explain away their behavior. You should hold other people accountable for their bad behavior and not keep your mouth shut when you see injustice. You should not just blindly follow the crowd. You should stand apart, express your ideas and opinions, and keep on expressing them, in a professional and respectful way. You should remind yourself that 'being respectful and nice does not define you as a weak person', and that 'saying no does not define you as a bad person'. This is what I say to women now--be professional, have a healthy self-confidence, think for yourselves, and don't become workplace doormats. It's the only way to grow into the best versions of yourselves.

Black Cherries--a poem by W.S. Merwin

I often find myself thinking about how human beings are an odd mixture of so many different interests and influences. I know I fit that description. I can go from listening to hard rock one day, to reading and finding meaning in a poem that touches me with its simplicity the next day. The fact that we can move from one sphere to another freely, is what makes us human. I am glad for the incongruities and illogical behavior I see in myself, because I find it helps me relate to others (who are much the same).

In that vein, moving on from yesterday's post about a rock song that I really like, here is a poem that I found this morning in a New York Times obituary for the poet W.S. Merwin (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/15/obituaries/w-s-merwin-dead-poet-laureate.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&fbclid=IwAR0hJX5PK6Zmj_gY_mBuKHfBPLAS3yhWUXMtyKvd2F9l9fhG1HZnYJVmFfI). I haven't read much of his poetry, but that can be remedied. This poem is entitled Black Cherries, and it is a beautiful poem.


BLACK CHERRIES

Late in May as the light lengthens
toward summer the young goldfinches
flutter down through the day for the first time
to find themselves among fallen petals
cradling their day’s colors in the day’s shadows
of the garden beside the old house
after a cold spring with no rain
not a sound comes from the empty village
as I stand eating the black cherries
from the loaded branches above me
saying to myself Remember this

 by W.S. Merwin

Good song alert--Joker and the Thief, by Wolfmother

I've been doing a lot of repetitive work for one of my research projects, which involves counting cells on a computer screen. One mouse click is one cell counted--that kind of thing. It can get tiresome very quickly. So I've been listening to music with real energy and drive while I do this kind of counting, and it makes the work a whole lot more tolerable. Here is one of the songs I've been listening to: Joker and the Thief, by Wolfmother--it's become a real favorite of mine.

More of Bramhall's political cartoons

Once again, Bramhall's political cartoons are spot on...... He has taken Oliphant's place, and those were big shoes to fill. I think he fills them quite well.

Here are his recent ones: https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/nydn-bramhall-cartoons-for-january-2019-20190108-photogallery.html

An article about shame worth reading

Worth reading: a recent article in The New York Post by Maureen Callahan ...........

There is no shame left in America anymore  https://nypost.com/2019/03/07/there-is-no-shame-left-in-america-anymore/

Love this song--Juice, by Lizzo

Loved it from the first time I heard it--pure funk.......Lizzo's having fun. Definitely makes you want to get up and dance. Works for me!!....Enjoy.

Howards End--the TV series

I watched this four-part series from 2018 last night, and can highly recommend it. It is based on the book Howards End by EM Forster. Matthew Macfadyen, Hayley Atwell, Philippa Coulthard and the rest of the cast are just wonderful. Rather than my writing a review about it, I'll include the Imdb link to the show: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2577192/?ref_=ttexrv_exrv_tt   Enjoy watching some excellent television.........

And a few more articles.......

Survivors of Sexual Abuse Want Church Reform. Here’s Why It Might Not Happen. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/20/world/europe/vatican-catholic-sex-abuse.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

With Victims Converging Outside Vatican’s Walls, Francis Opens Meeting on Clerical Sexual Abuse  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/world/europe/pope-francis-church-abuse.html?action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article&region=Footer

Gay Priests, Secret Rules and the Abuse of Nuns: Some of the Vatican Controversies as Bishops Meet  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/world/europe/catholic-church-sex-abuse.html?action=click&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=Article&region=Footer&contentCollection=Europe

Credibility of Catholic church at stake in sexual abuse summit  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/18/credibility-of-catholic-church-at-stake-sexual-abuse-summit

More articles about the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church

These are some of the recent articles that are worth reading, concerning the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church. If the dinosaurs in the church do not deal with this crisis, they (and the church) will sink, slowly but surely, into the mud of extinction, and deservedly so. And if the church does sink, it has only itself to blame. It could have taken the initiative many years ago to rid itself of the criminals within its walls; it knew about them and it protected them nonetheless, for decades. It has lost a lot of credibility. I for one no longer look to the church for moral leadership in the world. It has failed miserably at moral leadership within its own ranks. How can you preach one thing to the world, and then practice within your walls the opposite of what you preach? Whenever you protect criminals at the expense of the victims, you are no better than the slime that grows under the rocks, in the dark, away from the light of day. Whenever you protect pedophiles that are good at fundraising for the church, you tell the world what really matters to you. And it is not abused children. And while I know some priests want to blame the sexual abuse scandal on gay men, they cannot. Pedophilia and homosexuality are not one and the same thing. And pedophilia is not caused by celibacy either. 

How will Pope Francis deal with abuse in the Catholic Church? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-47201647

The root cause of the Catholic crisis: It's the culture that views priests and bishops as a privileged class. https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-the-root-cause-of-the-catholic-crisis-20190219-story.html

The Catholic Church Is Breaking People’s Hearts.  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/19/opinion/catholic-church-gay-discrimination.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

The Vatican’s Gay Overlords. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/opinion/vatican-gay-priests.html?module=inline

Blaming homosexuality for abuse of minors is distraction, victims say.  https://www.archbalt.org/blaming-homosexuality-for-abuse-of-minors-is-distraction-victims-say/

They say they were sexually abused by priests, then silenced. Now these women are speaking out.  https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/20/europe/catholic-france-order-women-abuse-intl/index.html

Failure to respond to emails in the workplace--a growing problem

I read this article in today's New York Times:  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/opinion/sunday/email-etiquette.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

and it got me to thinking about my own experiences with sending and receiving emails in the workplace. I find myself getting increasingly irritated by the number of people who do not respond to the emails I send them. And I am not a person who sends unnecessary emails. But I am a person who tries to respect the five levels of hierarchical leadership in my workplace, and the multiple managers that I must relate to and communicate with about one issue. I formally report to two leaders, but if I need to send an email to the leaders under them in the hierarchy (four people, all middle-level managers), then I must also cc: the two top leaders. If I send an email to the leaders under the four middle-level managers, then I must cc: the four middle-level managers and the two top leaders, and so on, ad nauseam. Of course this means that the two top leaders get an immense amount of emails that they may not always need to get or respond to. And if there was trust in the workplace, if leaders trusted the managers under them, then they wouldn't need to be copied onto all emails at all times. But the standard m.o. is 'cover your ass'. Employees know this, and also that they will be called onto the carpet if they do anything that their managers are not informed about. And they do get called onto the carpet for daring to do something that a leader or manager has not approved. And so on.

Leaders and managers have no business complaining about the volume of email they receive, especially if they are responsible for and support a system as outlined in the first paragraph. Their jobs require them to respond to emails from their employees, most of whom end up completely stymied and unable to do their jobs properly if they don't get the necessary responses from their managers and leaders.

Failure to respond to emails is rude. Plain rude. I don't mean by this that you as a leader/manager need to respond immediately to an email. But when two weeks go by without a response, that is unacceptable for employees working on a project who require a response from above in order for them to progress with the project. They are stymied, the project is stymied, and the people who depend upon their progress down the line are stymied. This leads to inefficiency and inertia in the workplace.

I also think that failure to respond to emails can be a deliberate tactic to stymie employees who are creative and who have good solutions to problems. It is a way of telling them that their ideas don't matter. I see that very often in my workplace; my co-workers complain about this often. They end up feeling disrespected and unappreciated.

So, as a manager or leader, don't complain that your workplace is inefficient and that your employees are not motivated, when you have not responded properly to their emails that are required by you in order to get approval or permission to do their jobs. No one wants to hear how busy you are, because we are all busy. Stop complaining, stop wasting your time going to endless and useless meetings, and make it a priority to answer your employees' emails. Chances are that if you treat your employees with respect, they will respond in kind. Answer those emails. And maybe, just maybe, efficiency in the workplace will make a comeback.

My sci-fi heart and the death of Oppy

Who knew, who ever knows, how one will react to different news stories? The demise of the Mars Rover Opportunity after 15 years spent on the Red Planet touched me in a way I didn't realize was possible. Perhaps it was its last message to its scientist caretakers here on earth at NASA that got to me: "My battery is low and it's getting dark". My heart went out to 'Oppy'. As I wrote on Facebook--"its demise is strangely poignant". For me and for many others, it is. I realize that I'm talking about a robot, but for some reason, the fact that it could relay that message to the scientists told me that in some strange way, it 'knew' that it was dying, as it knew that it was alive. And that's enough for me. Have I read and seen too many sci-fi books and movies? Perhaps. But NASA understands us and has made it possible for those who want to send a postcard in memory of Oppy, to do so. I sent a postcard that read: "Thank you for 15 years of service, Oppy. Rest in peace on the Red Planet. Maybe one day some of us will join you there".

Here is the link if you want to do the same:   https://mars.nasa.gov/participate/postcard/opportunity-rover/#Step-1, and a link to the original article I read this morning: https://abc7ny.com/5137455/?fbclid=IwAR05vvlqMPgZDiUNPi5WbMAQ7YRC4TU2xVvOV37Z5kEoWWTrTz_dhypHIDU

There are many of us who will miss Oppy. Thank you NASA, for all the great work you did keeping Oppy up and running, and for the important and necessary work you do, everyday. Your work inspires those of us who are curious, adventurous, interested in space exploration, and interested in science.

Cemetery Road--my new poetry collection

I recently published my fifth collection of poetry, entitled Cemetery Road. It was written following my brother's death in 2015. As the book description reads:

How do we deal with the death of a loved one? These poems were written following the untimely death of the author's brother, and touch on our ever-present awareness of mortality as well as on our feelings of loss and grief in connection with death. They also touch on the losses that all of us experience as we age, be they letting go of our past or of our identities in society, and the grief attached to both.

It is available on Amazon.com: http://tinyurl.com/y4ww8xh4

Funny whether you're pro-Brexit or anti-Brexit

A pathologist colleague and friend sent this to me today. Whether you're pro-Brexit or anti-Brexit, you'll have to admit that this is pretty funny! Here is the link to the original posting (posted Feb 9, 2019 by Martin Armstrong):  https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/britain/medical-professions-view-of-brexit/
----------------------------------------------------------

The Medical Profession were asked: should Brexit take place?

The Allergists were in favor of scratching it, but the Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.

The Gastroenterologists had sort of a gut feeling about it, but the Neurologists thought the Brexiters had a lot of nerve.

Meanwhile, Obstetricians felt certain everyone was laboring under a misconception, while the Ophthalmologists considered the idea shortsighted.

Pathologists yelled, "Over my dead body!" while the Pediatricians said, "Oh, grow up!"

The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the Radiologists could see right through it.

Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing and the Internists claimed it would indeed be a bitter pill to swallow.

The Plastic Surgeons opined that May’s proposal would "put a whole new face on the matter."

The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea.

Anesthesiologists thought it was all a gas, and those lofty Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no.

In the end, the Proctologists won out, leaving the entire decision up to the assholes in Parliament.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elena Ferrante's brilliant Neapolitan quadrilogy

I just finished reading Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan quadrilogy, and I recommend it highly: My Brilliant Friend, The Story of a New Name, Those Who Leave and Those Who Stay, and The Story of the Lost Child. It would be hard for me to summarize her books adequately in this post, but the impressions they made on me will stay with me forever. Italian men, at least at the time when the author was young (1940s and 1950s), do not come off well at all, at least in the non-educated part of Italian society, specifically, Naples at that time. They beat their wives and children regularly; the women accepted it and the children became afraid of their fathers. Men raped their wives/forced them to have sex. Poverty was rampant, as was corruption. Many of the married men had lovers with whom they started new families while still married to the first wives. Homosexual men were beaten to death. Violence was a huge part of the society at that time.

Elena Ferrante is a pseudonym for the author of these powerful books. Given their subject matter, given the author’s desire for privacy, I think it is fitting that she wrote that way. Why do we need to know who she really was? The important thing is the books, the message, the freedom with which she wrote, not holding back about anything, really. She writes from a gut place; sometimes I got the feeling that the books just poured out of her. They are fiercely honest books, filled with events that are embarrassing, cringe-worthy, frightening, and horrific (the abuse that Lila endures, for example, at the hands of her first husband Stefano, and earlier, at the hands of her father). Elena and Lila are lifelong friends; their friendship is an odd one, not easily explained and not easy to read about. It is raw, honest, at times abusive (at least Lila’s behavior toward Elena), but there is a love there that is hard to define. They seem to need each other; Lila needs for Elena to become a successful writer (she does); Elena needs for Lila to break free of Naples and to reach her potential as the smart woman she is (it is unclear if she really manages that by the end of the series). But Lila is the person who Elena looks up to. Lila is by turns brash, aggressive, rude, mean, non-compliant, ambitious, passive, passive-aggressive, kind, loving, and then not—all over again. She is mercurial and beautiful—the type of woman that all men want, at least in Elena’s eyes. She is also fiercely intelligent, which Elena talks about often--but her ambition for higher education is thwarted by her family and her circumstances. Elena is also beautiful, but much less sure of herself, and certainly not mercurial and mean like Lila. 

All of us have known a Lila in our lives. They are the women who walk into a room, and it becomes quiet—all eyes on her. She is the woman that many other women fear, because she does not seem to need men in her life, even though there is always a man there. And the men fall for that type of woman because they think she will make no demands of them like most ordinary women, never realizing for a second that this is exactly the trap that Lila sets for men. She is the femme fatale who lures them in, and then uses them for all they are worth. Given her background of abuse at the hands of the men in her early life, it is perhaps no surprise that she behaves that way and that this is the type of woman she has become. Elena grows up differently; her father doesn’t directly abuse her, but he shows little interest in her. Her mother is emotionally abusive to her, and their relationship is strained for years. Elena is smart, and as luck would have it, her intelligence as a child is recognized by a teacher who essentially orders her parents to let her pursue higher education. Since there is no money for that in her family, the teacher helps her out with books and other materials, as does Lila when she first marries Stefano, who is wealthy. Elena always wonders why the teacher never did the same for Lila, whose parents also had no money. The difference was also that Elena’s parents, while resenting the teacher’s intrusion into their lives, obeyed her orders, whereas Lila’s parents would never have done so. So Lila was not as lucky as Elena when it came to being able to pursue an education. Lila tried for years to keep up with Elena, and Elena helps her by sharing her books with her, but Lila realizes that it is impossible to keep up, and because she cannot enjoy what Elena is enjoying, she rejects it utterly and begins to snipe at Elena’s progress and success. And so it goes for many years. Most of the Lila types in this life do not end up with happy and successful lives; rather they crash and burn in middle age when their beauty starts to fade, and they often end up friendless.

Elena and Lila’s friendship is a strange mixture of caring, not caring, jealousy, envy, ambition, thwarted ambition, fear, abuse, melancholy, bitterness, sometimes happiness, but most often confusion. Elena is never sure where she has Lila, and by the time she stops caring about exactly that and begins to live life on her own terms, she is in her late twenties. By that time, she has watched the married Lila seduce Nino, her first love, run off with him to live with him, and then watch as Nino leaves her behind and disappears. Lila’s life descends into a chaotic mess, but as time goes on, she achieves some sort of success; she lives in Naples with Enzo, the man who rescues her from Stefano, and with her son Gennaro (who is Stefano’s son). They learn about the computer world together, and start their own computer company. For a while, they earn good money. But as always, life steps in, tragedy hits, and the misery starts all over again.

Elena leaves Naples and marries Pietro, and they have two daughters together. She tries to keep writing after the success of her first novel that was published shortly before her marriage, but she struggles with her ambition and trying to find time for it all—writing and taking care of a husband and family. She struggles with confidence and lack of it, with confusion, with trying to understand the society and politics around her, and with trying to understand her relationship with Lila. She feels guilty, I think, for her success, certain that it is actually Lila's doing. She never seems to be able to accept that she is just as intelligent, if not more so, than Lila. Her intelligence includes being able to adapt to situations, to accept what she cannot change. Lila never learns that, and becomes brittle as she ages. Elena is by turns reflective and realistic. She understands that even though Pietro is an academic like she is, he does not support her academic endeavors, or perhaps more correctly stated—he does not think that her academic career is as important as his own. And then Nino reappears in her life, and her life descends into chaos. Suffice it to say that Nino is a destructive force in the lives of those he inserts himself into. Smart women, foolish choices. Lila and Elena are two women who fit that bill.

Elena Ferrante grew up in the 1940s and 1950s; we grew up in the 1960s and 1970s. By that time, roles had changed for men and women, or at least the expectations of what men and women would have as roles when they married. Feminism changed a lot of things, for better and for worse. Strangely enough, it never occurred to me when I was young that anyone would want to punish me or any other woman because we were intelligent, or try to stifle it, or try to dominate us and force us to pretend that we were not smart or that we would not use our intelligence. I understood later that there existed people—men and women—who wanted to do just that, out of envy and spite. Sometimes men were downright abusive to women who were intelligent and ambitious--the women who wanted a marriage based on equality and mutual respect. When I have spoken to priests and other adults about how women were often treated badly by husbands, some of them would say that women should ‘do their duty’ and submit to their husbands.  I once challenged a priest by asking him why women should ‘obey’ a man, as in “Wives, obey your husbands as you obey the Lord. The husband is the head of the wife, just as Christ is the head of the church people”, when so many men forgot the other saying—“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it….” I got no answer, and that’s because there are very few men who love their wives as Christ loved the church. He knew that just as well as I did, but he couldn’t admit it.

Ferrante’s novels made me reflect on so many things, and those reflections have made me sad, as I knew they would, because they reopened personal wounds and touched on events that happened many years ago. But my life is so much richer for having read her books. When I look at our society now, there is perhaps less violence (there are laws against wife-beating and child abuse), but there is rampant use of pornography that has become increasingly violent against women. I don’t know what to make of society anymore, and I often ask if we really do want peace. I am looking for respect between the sexes, and I don’t see much of it. Even in the Catholic Church, there are huge problems when it comes to attitudes toward women. I think that the church needs a huge overhaul and that it needs to re-evaluate where it wants to go, because at present, it is no longer the moral force in the world that it used to be, and that people want it to be. I also think that it needs to clearly examine its attitudes toward women; it does defend them, yes, but it has a problem, like most of society, with highly-intelligent women. I have seen some very good marriages in my lifetime, but I would not define most as happy. Marriage works well if there is love there (including sexual love), but since no one can really define love properly, there is an element of luck in all of it. People can and do change over time, and become better people, and that will lead to happier marriages, but when I look at the pain caused by one party toward the other, when I look at all the unhappiness I have seen in marriages, I am surprised that the divorce rate isn’t higher than it is, at least in Westernized countries. Having said that, I think that marriages where both parties work (inside the home or outside of it) and respect each other’s abilities, where both have similar education and value systems, also when it comes to raising children, have a better chance of success than very traditional ones where the wife has been forced by a man, a society, a patriarchy, or a religion, to choose that traditional life, which often leads to frustration and unhappiness. Unfortunately, Catholic men are also quite unenlightened about many things concerning women, their wives/sisters/ mothers/daughters, and what women want, regardless of whether we are talking about Naples, Italy, southern Europe, Britain, or the United States. Ferrante’s novels work because she throws light on attitudes and behavior that most people would prefer stay in the shadows, in the dark. She throws open the doors and the windows and says, these are women’s lives and they are not easy lives. Pay attention.

It never ends--now the Pope says that nuns were sexually abused by priests and bishops

How deep does the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church go? Very deep, as it turns out. It seems that every time I turn around, there is a new allegation of abuse. Now the Pope has acknowledged that nuns have been sexually abused by priests and bishops:  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/05/world/europe/pope-nuns-sexual-abuse.html . I didn't see the statistics presented anywhere, but I'm sure they will be available shortly. It wouldn't even matter to me at this point what the actual numbers are. What appalls me is how the Church initially responded to the victims--by ignoring them, by supporting the abusers, or by sweeping all of it under the rug to be dealt with at a later time, or never dealt with. The latter was the modus operandi until the past few years when the outing of criminal priests became a reality and forced the Church's hand. One wonders if they ever would have dealt with the sexual abuse scandals had they not been forced to.

I am disgusted by the entire business and appalled by the hypocrisy. Here we grew up with all these strict ridiculous rules regarding sex--no premarital sexual activity short of intercourse, no intercourse, and no birth control. All were grievous sins. That's what we were told. Even married couples were made to feel that practicing birth control put their souls at risk. The truth is that most lay Catholics behave much better than many of the priests who have been preaching to them all these years. We grew up with the fire and brimstone sermons. We feared going to confession, feared being reamed out, but if you ask me, our sins pale in comparison to the sins of the sexual abusers, the pedophiles, and the rapists (all criminals) that were and are found in the Catholic clergy. I saw a comment in the New York Times to the above article that said, and I quote "The Pope does not seem to understand that the Church is burning to the ground. The credibility of the Pope's statements and the Church's actions are questionable." I agree with the commenter; it scares me that we may be living in a time where all the things that we took for granted were good and true, are in reality, quite the opposite, and are now being exposed for the shams they actually are. The question is--what remains when the dust and ash settle--when the fire is over. That's what scares me. I no longer believe that the Church is the road to heaven. I know that it is possible to honor Christ without having to believe that. Do I still go to Church? Yes, I do--because I like the celebration of the mass and that one hour a week to reflect on something other than the rampant materialism that characterizes the world. But the part of me that doubts, the part that is confused, the part that is furious--all those parts are growing stronger by the day. I don't know if I will be able to contain them. I am no longer patient inside. I would prefer a quiet mass without sermons. Sometimes I sit in the pew and listen to yet another uninspired irrelevant sermon and I feel like standing up and yelling--talk about the sexual abuse scandal in the Church, tell us what you are doing about it, condemn it and the perpetrators, talk about the misuse of power, the abuse of children and women. Talk about the inequity between men and women, talk about the patriarchies that have ruined the lives of women and children, talk about the refusal of the Church to take women seriously and to allow them to become priests, talk about spousal abuse (physical, emotional, psychological), talk about the brutality of the messages that many of us grew up with. But I don't think I will hear any of those sermons in my lifetime. So much of our childhood was about fear of authority, about instilling compliance in us, about having absolute power over us. I no longer have that fear, I am no longer compliant, and no one has absolute power over me. Those days are long gone. I rely rather on the fact that if God made us all in his/her image and likeness, that we were given a powerful brain by that same God, a god-like brain, that God intended for us to use wisely, humbly and gratefully. I for one, have chosen to use it in those ways.