Violence doesn't discriminate; neither should assistance

Domestic violence doesn't discriminate.  Fortunately, neither does Bradley Angle.

Despite the common perception that only straight women and their children are victims of domestic and sexual violence, it affects people of all income levels, races, gender and gender identity, ages and sexual orientation.  Yes, it's true.  Straight men and members of the GLBT community and their children are also victimized and need help.

Here's where Bradley Angle comes in.  They offer "safety, empowerment, healing and hope" to everyone, no judgement, no discrimination.

This is where you come in, because they can't do it alone.  You can help members of our community escaping violent relationships by supporting Bradley Angle.  Donate and/or volunteer and/or help spread the word.

Or, if you like wine, shoes or games of chance, plan to attend their Wine Women & Shoes event.*

*It may be Wine Women & Shoes, but they want the men there, too.

I want you

Hey, you guys, guess what ... I've signed on for another tour of duty with the American Cancer Society Relay For Life of Portland.  You know what that means ... I want you to sign on for another tour, too.

This year, R4L of PDX has been chosen by the American Cancer Society to be a registration site for the CPS-3 study and I'm going to help promote it - recruit volunteers to sign people up during the Relay on July 21 and recruit volunteers to participate in the study.

What I want from you:
1.  Volunteer to "work the tent" and register participants in the study,
and/or
2.  Be part of history by participating in the study,
and/or
3.  Spread the word.  Join my promotion efforts and generate buzz about CPS-3.  Encourage everyone you know that is eligible to saunter on down to Willamette Park July 21 between 3 and 7:00pm and get engaged in the anti-cancer cause.

What is CPS-3?
Great question.  I'm glad you asked.  It's a long-term study that will help researchers better identify the lifestyle, environmental, and genetic factors that cause or prevent cancer.

The American Cancer Society's Epidemiology Research Program is inviting men and women between the ages of 30 and 65 years who have no personal history of cancer to join this historic research study. The ultimate goal is to enroll at least 300,000 adults from various racial/ethnic backgrounds from across the U.S.

This is epic people.  Seriously.  And I want you to be part of the epic-ocity with me.

Too squeamish to offer up your blood? No time to volunteer? Consider cash and make a donation.

The City of Portland hates me and wants me to move away

... okay, so not me specifically, but they definitely have no interest in making the city more livable for me and my demographic.

I've loved Portland unconditionally for so long, but in an all too common story, she seems only interested in taking and not giving.  Pre-hubs, pre-baby, everything was going along so well, but now that I'm asking for a little sumthin' sumthin' in return (navigable sidewalks, enforced crosswalks, a water bill that doesn't suck my child's college fund dry), she's turned on me.

Point 1: The previously protested coerced composting.  I have yet to hear a viable solution to the diaper problem (although, B is convinced M will be potty trained by 14 months).

Point 2: My water/sewer bill doubled while the units used remained the same.  Whoa.  Portland is becoming a  city where people below a certain economic level are not wanted.

Point 3: They feel no need for crosswalks.  To walk the mile from our house to the library and park (something we do often), we must cross a heavily driven street with no marked crosswalk for a three+ mile stretch.  Usually, we stand there with the stroller for about five minutes as cars, trucks, soccer mom mini vans, TriMet buses and police cars whiz by, ignoring us.  B is convinced the US transit system is designed to discourage pedestrians and argues we cannot teach M safe practices of crossing the road, because there are none.  I used to wonder why kids didn't hop on their bikes and ride to the library or park. Now I know.  It isn't safe ... not for stranger danger issues, but because they can't safely cross a road.  So unless the park is on the same block where you live, you're outta luck.

Point 4: Similarly, sidewalks need not be maintained, according to the City.  We have a great stroller, but most of the sidewalks in our area are cracked and full of horsts and grabens, maxing out what a stroller is meant to handle.  Only about 50% of our neighborhood sidewalks have ramps at the curbs.  B has developed a sort of "launch the baby" system to ride rough shod over it all, but it freaks me out.

Point 5: Lack of career opportunity.  A Masters degree and eight years experience in that field (six years at one organization with national recognition for development & execution of initiatives) earns you a job delivering sandwiches for a deli in Portland. Unless you are in the wind energy field or up for the risk of opening a food cart, Portland leadership isn't working in your favor.  I don't have stats on it, but my personal experience frames Portland as the field team for Seattle and San Francisco.  People want to live here, but for professional opportunity, they need to move.  SEA and SFO businesses seem ready, willing and able to scoop up Portland's underemployed talent.  Portland seems even worse when it comes to opportunities for women, although this extends to Oregon in general.  Time and again, we hear move here and I'll hire you in a second.

For years, I gave.  I paid taxes, I volunteered, I patronized businesses.  And I bragged.  Boy, did I brag about how wonderful Portland was.  Now I feel like I gave of myself, my time, my loyalty foolishly.  Portland pretended we had a mutually beneficial relationship, but when I sought a little in return, nothing was there.

Fortunately for me, I/we are wanted in other places, other cities.  They may not be my first love, but I'm optimistic I'll find true love ... and love in return.

Brand You

... or "What my dad taught me about marketing".

I remember my dad once telling my older sister when she was about 12, "if everybody likes you, you're doing something wrong".  He was talking to both of us, but directed this comment to her after she said she was friends with everyone at school.

First, Daina is one of the most genuinely kind people I've ever known, so I'm fairly certain everyone did like her. And if they didn't, it said more about them than her.

Second, his point has stuck with me and remained a driving core value the rest of my life (despite it not applying well to 12-year-old Daina).  If you're being true to yourself and your value system, there will be people who don't agree with you ... some won't like you even.  However, by bending to the popular opinion of the moment, you will inevitably compromise yourself ... and maybe you will stop liking you.

Too often marketers craft a message that attempts to appeal to everyone, but consequently ends up appealing to no one.  It's Marketing 101 - know your target market.  Do your homework.  Discover who values what you offer - who you are.  Find their need, solve their problem.  Go where they are.  Use the language they speak.

Don't compromise yourself, your ideas, your innovations, your services to appease the masses.  If you do, you dilute what you have to offer and end up not appealing to anyone.

Better is in the eye of the beholder

B made the assertion last night that, between the US and Oz, Australia has the better democracy.  This isn't new; we have similar discussions often.  However, our different voting systems prompted the recent round.  He argued their law requiring every citizen show up to vote results in truly engaging everyone in the political decision-making process.

I countered with the argument that by requiring everyone to vote you end up with people uninformed and uninterested in the political process choosing at random how to cast their vote.  At least the ~50% of US citizens who vote have (in theory) informed themselves and they're making deliberate choices.

Also, it doesn't feel very democratic to force people to vote.  Shouldn't the choice to not vote be present in a democracy.

B countered my later argument by saying they just have to show up.  Once you're in the voting booth, what you do with your ballot is up to you ... you can eat it and no one can stop you.

We went on like this for a while ... point-counterpoint ... until I put the queen in the mix.

Of course, I had to bring up the Queen.  I mean, how can their democracy be better if (in theory) Queen Elizabeth II can come and take control back any ol' time she feels like it?  She could decree every Australian citizen must own a Corgi and voila ... Corgis for everyone.

But I digress.  Point being, what do you think?  Is it more democratic to require citizens to vote or more democratic to allow citizens to make that choice for themselves?