Restorative Justice in personal relationships

This is the Spirit of Detroit. I grew up seeing it whenever my grandparents would take me downtown. I love this statue; it's the most glorious and meaninful of those I've ever seen--perhaps because my loyalty to Detroit is deep; perhaps because it stirs nostalgia.

The Spirit of Detroit represents Justice. We all want justice unless we are the violators of it. If someone steals something from us, "We want justice!" If a public official abuses his/her position, "We want justice!" We see the pursuit of justice on every level in our social organization--from the courthouse to the schoolhouse (in Chicago, we even have a school called SOCIAL JUSTICE). Some schools, in response to the School to Prison Pipeline, have adopted "restorative justice" practices to respond to students who violate others and/or relationships within a school community.

The principle behind restorative justice is as follows: The only way to pay back the "debt" (physical, emotional, mental violation of another) and "re-balance the scales of justice" is to "right the wrong" through retribution. The idea is not necessarily "eye for eye", but rather the admission of guilt and an act of humility that will restore the one who was hurt by the violation. The only way to re-balance the scales is to attempt to restore that which was taken from another.

In our school, and others that practice this type of restorative justice, perhaps the fitting act of penance for a student who steals another student's ipod would be to 1) admit to the crime, 2) return it, and 3) extend a public apology to the entire community, which was disrupted by the act of stealing. I would think that most of us would agree this is an appropriate (minimally) response to a student stealing,right? In fact, would it be possible for these students to be friends without resolving the violation? I think not.

In the same way, when there is violation in personal relationship, whether friendship or a romantic relationship, we must "right the wrong" if we ever think that any level of friendship is within reach.

I was talking with two different women this weekend about CRAZY things their exes did. One's ex BLEW HER CAR UP (LITERALLY!). Another's ex took things from her--things upon which she relied upon for livelihood. The latter friend and I have talked often about how FRIENSHIP with an ex who does insulting, disrespectful, cruel, and selfish things is not attainable UNTIL and UNLESS that person fesses up to the wrong, is real about what he/she did, and then makes it right. Lots of people try to just gloss and skim over things they do wrong to another. They avoid. They run from conversation. They are emotionally violent through IGNORING that the other person still exists. WHy would we expect anything less than "restorative justice" in a romantic relationship, family relationship, or close friendship?

Some expect that "time will heal all" with respect to violations they commit against others to whom they were once close. Time does not heal; confession, restoration, and forgiveness heals. Time just allows us to bury things and temporarily forget or construct compartments in our minds to help us ignore nawing feelings.

I was once told by someone who hurt me: "Just be a grown up. You gotta deal with that on your own". The person didn't want to "hear me out" for whatever reason. I have extended forgivness to that person, but a restored relationship is not possible until there is transparent and hard conversation. The friend whose ex stold very valuable possessions won't be able to just pop back into her life after a little time. NO! He has to admit wrong, even restore what was taken financially, and ask forgiveness. Sure, she's gone through her own stages of healing, but not until the other party extends retribution, that relationship cannot be restored. Forgivess doesn't require both parties. Relationship does.

"Casual" Gets Old--Literally

The conversation started with my brilliant, anthropologically bent buddy and ended with A over another whole red snapper on Love Day. My friend and I were talking about love and commitment and the lackluster lure of "casual". He told me about an article he found in the Onion: "Casual Sex Only Rewarding for First Few Decades". For you readers who don't know what the Onion is, it's news satire at its wittiest.

Casual Sex and/or dating. Gets old after awhile?

What is the fate of serial daters who resist commitment into middle age (or close to it)? It depends. Disclaimer: This is all anecdotal. No experimental design or research conducted here. Some wind up with a "baby momma" (or "baby daddy") or two or three and then just have such complicated lives from balancing so many angry women (or deadbeat dads or good men who are trying to start other families) that he's too exhausted to have a relationship that goes into committed love. (Please note: There is a difference between "baby momma/daddy" and "mother/father of my child". There are some highly evolved individuals who are able to be cooperative and cordial--I just happen to see a lot more of the other variety).Others somehow have a change of desire or orientation, want a serious relationship, but then find that they're "optioned" to frustration, cynnical, or that lots of people who they find intellectuallly and socially compatible are already taken (young co-eds are frustrating--I know from experience. I've been approached by men 10 years my junior and could barely stomach ONE DATE). Another group finds themselves in the abyss of the middle agers who look middle aged and who are no longer sexually attractive enough to be as successful in casual dating and sex. Protruding bellies, receding hairlines, atrophying muscles, yellowing toenails just make it hard to be a winner at a nightclub.

Yesterday, I woke up from a groggy nap to watch a few minutes of one of those Prime time adult cartoons--maybe Family Guy? The episode's comedy was rooted in the tragic life of one of those single "forty somethings" who let good women get away from him and then spent his days in dingy "wife beaters" stained with wing sauce, watching tv, drinking beer, and occasionally lamenting lost loves.

Though the character's bachelor misery was exaggerated for comedy's sake, I can see how that can be a bachelor's fate. What is casual dating based on? Hot, fun, detached sex or socializing. People who casually date aren't looking to shower another with support, time, a listening ear, investment. So if casual dating and sex is all about physical beauty or short term interesting exchanges, it makes sense that when a person no longer offers a young face and body or enegy to party late and long, he/she falls off the market.

Additionally, I still hold firm that healthy humans want to be known fully, yet loved. We are generally afraid of letting another see the fullness of our humanity--how broken, imperfect, "stank" we are. Yet, we still want to find "SOMEBODY" (see Depeche Mode's link below...my friend reminded me of this song yesterday). A casual date is not going to hold you and just love on you when you lose a friend or family member. A casual date won't let you cry to him/her. A casual date might judge you if your house or car's a mess or if your outfit just doesn't quite work. Most of us generally won't even ask a casual date for a ride to O'Hare. We get tired of casual dating by our middle years. It's just too exhausting, and we want the security that is characterized by sitting in holey socks and sweats on the couch on a lazy Saturday morning. But the comfort of sitting in holey socks with bed head takes effort to reach.

Am I saying that single people older than 30 will wind up with big bellies with food stained t-shirts, become lonely animal hoarders, or miserable? Absolutley not. In fact, if I don't marry, I think I will be a ridiculously cool single person--running half marathons, maybe cool locs, ageless, strong, rock musician, a good aunt,sister, daughter, friend (but definitely not spreading myself thin in casual dating). It seems, though, that those who do single well at middle aged don't trifle in casual flings but rather invest themselves in family, career, and good friends to keep growing personally.

Seems that the older we get, the more "casual" gets "old".

Thin Line Between Love and Hate, Part II

Do you ever wonder, as I do (but I do, GENERALLY, think too much), how people can be be "IN LOVE"enough to agree to vows and marriage on some bright, happy day, and then, somehow, end up in bitter divorce, name calling, and tragically, in some cases, homicide?

How is it that a man can murder the woman who he once loved? How is it that a man can spit on a man whom she once kissed with those same lips? How does this happen? These are not rhetorical questions. I really think about this a lot. How does love end up in hate?

I don't have a lot of experience in this. I TRIED to have a boyfriend my senior year in high school; but Mom and Dad shut that down quick. I once snuck out to be with him, and of course, Jr. Holy Spirit (aka, "Mom") somehow found out. I was terrified the whole drive home. She tried to be slick and asked if I needed a "morning after pill"--she just wanted to know if I had done "it" and was trying to use some mind bending momma manipulation on me. Everything calmed down when I, in my terror, quickly blurted out that we were only up talking all night. While we didn't have curfews and weren't on tight leashes at all (my parents rarely asked where I was going because they trusted me so much), dating was frowned upon. Mom would say we had too much to do as adults (AND AS AN ADULT NOW, WITH LOTS OF RESPONSIBILITIES AND LIFE TO LIVE, I FULLY AGREE. WHY DO TEENS DATE!?!?!?) and that "dating" for 17 and 18 year olds was pointless since we couldn't really do anything but EXPERIMENT.

So, we had lots of male friends and we were encouraged to spend time with them in the presence of our parents, other teens, or those boys' families. I didn't date at all in college. I know weird. Well, no, I take that back...I TRIED to date a couple of guys, but apparently, I was "too nice" (both tried to come back when they were ready to marry, but I was "done" by then). I dated one friend in my adult years--it didn't work for reasons I do not wish to discuss in this venue. Sure, I've had countless dinners, business meetings, coffee dates, an evening out, etc with men, but multiple "I'm so in love but now I'm not" encounters to understand how this goes...not so much. So, how does it work? What happens that turns intense fiery red hot love into fiery red passionate HATRED? I do know a couple of people who don't hate exes--but there also didn't seem to be mutual love. In the cases that I've seen where there isn't hatred, one or both parties were just being casual. I do know people who have been mutually in love and are friends, or at least cordial (like Uncle B says, holding onto unforgiveness is just too much negative energy).

So what is it that turns love into hate (sometimes murderous)? Disappointment? A feeling of being abandoned? Used? What is it? Resentment because of a feeling of being trapped?

Thin Line Between Love and Hate, Part I

Why is it that most people don't talk to their exes? Some people can't even bring themselves to pucker their lips to utter an ex's name. A couple of girlfriends and I joke about how we might just physically jump one of their exes (he hurt all of us when he walked away from their relationship--and we're all just kinda not getting over it as maybe as quickly as Jesus would want us to) :)

"A" opened my eyes to WHY there is such painful separation and distance between "exes". We were sharing a whole, head n' tail n' all red snapper at Havana Libre, fixed in a very intense and deep conversation about LOSS.

You see, loss generally hurts, or at least, disappoints(unless it's unnecessary weight). There are, however, distinctly different losses. There are losses that are natural, and therefore, by nature, easier to accept. Then there are losses that are V I O L A T I N G. Straight up nasty...raw, oozing, bloody, just plain ole' nasty.

The loss of my grandfather was one of those natural losses. My grandfather helped raise me. I have such vivid memories of him being up at 5am drinking his caramel colored coffee while preparing his Sunday sermon. I remember him force feeding me pig ears. I remember his happy songs. I remember him sitting on the porch, whistling nonsensical songs on our Westside Detroit block. When he passed, I was filled with grief, but I was also able to stand proudly at his funeral and talk about him with great strength. THe loss of our wonderful patriarch was painful to all of us, yet is was a natural loss--he lived into his 80s and lived a full life. Understanding that we all must pass that way, his death was a loss did not feel like a defrauding thing.

The loss, however, of a dear friend, husband, wife, lover, boyfriend, girlfriend, confidant--not through death but due to his/her lack of desire to stay in your life--is a life shattering loss. I have plenty of friends who are in counseling, been in counseling, and need to go to counseling as the result of this kind of loss. Some people don't ever recover from broken heartedness and think that physical death is the only way to find relief from the shattering loss of unrequited love. As the character Mayah Hayes from Defintely, Maybe asks, "Did you know that 35 people try to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge each year, most because of broken hearts?"

When you invest all of your resources--time, money, education, skills, talent, friendships, career,etc--for the strengthening of another because you are committed in every way to that person, and they don't show appreciation, reciprocity, or even accept that investment, and eventually pull away emotionally, and then physically, the loss of that relationship feels violating (wow. that was a serious run on). Of course, the most evolved of you readers--those who have reached Nirvana (or maybe just in denial) may argue that true love has no expectation. That's another entry. We're talking about those relationships that do require reciprocity. Most of us would not stay in friendships or dating relationships in which we gave extraordinarily and the other person just took, took, and took. Just not reality. Why is this kind of loss violating? Perhaps because there is no death or other uncontrollable force that separates the two? A person willfully walks away, and in doing so, MAY communicate, "I just don't want to be part of your life to see what happens to you. I just don't want to walk alongside you. I just don't want the responsibility of supporting and encouraging you." The loss feels like abandonment, not the natural course of loss that happens through death.

Loss of a relationship through death (unless that death is suicide), is involuntary on the part of the departed. However, when a person who, for a season, claimed they loved you (and maybe even married you because of that love, makes a baby with you, used to bring you Theraflu when you were sick, used to enjoy meals with you, used to dance with you, used to talk to you about your career and life plans, just "ups" and does't care about any of the aforementioned any more, that's VOLUNTARY. And that mess HURTS. VOLUNTARY AND VIOLATING. Some would argue emotionally violent. How did you used to care and now you don't? What does that communicate?

I'm not saying that relationships should not end voluntarily. I'm not saying that at all. I just think that we should dig deeper to explore why certain losses cut us to the core...and maybe try to do it less to people?? maybe?

"Let's Stay Together"--WHY?

Inspired enough by my late convo with a brilliant friend of mine over nectar mexicano, and clearly inspired enough to push through this migraine and fatigue from shovelling out of Blizzard 2011, I want to invite us to think through what would keep a postmodern couple together. Disclaimer: The migraine is really shortcircuiting wit. This is going to be quick and to the point.

Seriously. Why would two relatively wealthy (as Americans) individuals, whose distinct, horrifically equally dysfunctional upbrinings, full of the complexities of humanity (present even in the strongest families), AGREE--in fact, VOW, to stay together FOREVER. FOR-EVA'? FOR-eva eva??

Most of us have grandparents who stayed together--even if they couldn't stomach each other to sleep in the same bedroom by the time they had reached their 70s--both were present at holidays, birthdays, family cookouts. I've occasionally heard of divorced grandparents--that just feels weird when I hear those stories. Our grandmothers stayed through infidelity, emotional absenteeism, and many, many CLOTH diapers (my grandmothers had 13 and 6 children respectively). Our grandfathers stayed through hard, long hours at factories, mortgages that seemed to never be caught up, and sheer monotony (they NEVER saw the world as many of us have).

My anthropologically bent friend believes it was sheer social turbulence that kept our forefathers locked in holy matrimony. Simply put, they NEEDED one another. Rent couldn't be paid on one income. Immigration into a new country was too lonely and hard alone (beyond economics). Partnership was viewed as a way to "make it"--a way to stabilize.

Now, we all "single ladies" and "can find another you in a minute". Women can afford to buy their own properties. Men continue to and have many options. We can choose from many different "options" and as soon as we get bored or are just not "feeling it", we can move onto the next. We're marrying later and we're divorcing more frequently. And why would divorce not be the logical solution if you're not getting along, feeling bored with the monogomy (oops, I meant monotony), and especially if you don't NEED the other to "make it" in this country.

Is it true? Did our forefathers stay together out of sheer need? or did something deeper (and more romantic and noble) keep them together? Now that we're financially independent, have all kinds of racial, educational, personality and body type options, do we feel compelled to have shorter relationships that aren't expected to last the long haul? What's the benefit of "forever"? Why "forever"? Pros? Cons? Pros and cons to 1-2 year flinglationships?

Why is it so hard to take Al Green's advice to just "STAY TOGETHER"?

Love Hard, Hard Hurt

Move on.

These two words are easier for some of us to do than for others after a break up (whether it's the end of a casual dating relationship or divorce). Why is it that some people become obsessed with the "whys" of their breakups and seem to drown in despair, while others are able to quickly "move onto the next one"?

I regularly talk with friends who are having a hard time "moving on". I also have a hard time "moving on" (from anything or anyone because my loyalty is deep and fierce. I had a hard time moving on from my "jheri curl", from loving Charles Clingman and Maurcie Johnson--my Detroit childhood sweethearts who I never forgot--). The "moving on" to which I am referring is the letting go of memories of pain and hurt, not necessarily a person. While one may have the strength and clarity to realize that the one who they loved is better off estranged, he/she may still feel the deep pangs of loss and sorrow long after the relationship is over. And I'm not talking about bitterness, hatred and unforgiveness--not at all. I'm talking about being vulnerable to tears, heart ache, and cycles of depression and awareness of loss.

Some suggest the degree of post-break up trauma is gender determined. In his book "Men Don't Heal, We Ho--a Book About the Emotional Instability in Men", author Steven James Dixon argues that in order to avoid the pain of the loss of love, men turn to promiscuity--new lovers help to forget, they distract. I haven't read the book, but I've heard it's hilarious and eye opening as the author tells of how he was transformed from a man who used women to a faithful partner. Through escaping through using women sexually, he was always able to "move on" quickly--he thought he was, but a "mirror dropped down from heaven" (his words) to show that he was only masking a broken heart and soul.

While there may be some gender trends, I must say that I have met a few women (maybe a couple) who go through a myriad of relationships or partners, too, and seemingly, they're fine.

So, if you don't ascribe to the idea that men are able to just move on easier (and some people strongly argue that women are just more emotionally attached then men and are) simply because they are men, what determines how well and how easily one can "move on"?

I want to argue it's the degree to which one loves. I am more and more convinced that those who love deeply and who love well, are also hit much harder when that love abruptly comes to an end. Steven James Dixon wasn't loving women, he was using them for his own sexual gratification. Because he didn't allow his heart to open to a woman in sincere love, he was able to easily "move on".

My uncle says there are two categories of people: "givers" and "takers" (I do see these categories, but perhaps it's an oversimplification--I see people who are either horrible or healthy tensions of the two). Those who give deeply, love deeply, truly invest in another human being seem much more saddened when the object of their affection just walks away from that love. Those who date for fun, excitement, new experiences (all very self satisfying and selfish) are less "other centered". They, perhaps, aren't entering the relationship to give to the point of sarificial love.

Sometimes, a person feels weak and foolish when they don't "move on" emotionally from the loss of love. In recent days, however, I see those who allow themselves to linger in the loss (as long as it doesn't distract them from a general sense of joy and healthiness) as brave and strong. They face the storm. They weather it. They take the pain into their bosoms. They make themselves vulnerable, and love cannot begin unless sincere vulnerability is at the foundation.

So if you hurt deeply after each loss (and you don't run and hide behind more and more casual flings), bless God that your soul is healthy and alive enough to still LOVE! Blessed are those who hurt deeply after losing love...coulda been another Beatitude in Matthew 5.

Back, Black and Bustin' Windows Out of Cars

I am disappointed--but not suprised--that I have not written in months; I blame it on my career. Most teachers are consumed by our work (which is why we only have other teacher friends; other people get tired of hearing about George* , the junior who won't get his act straight, and who becomes my default conversation after talk about love, life, and family), and most of us, find it hard to do much outside of the school day. Add community and church work, good friends, grocery shopping, meal prep, and running/working out, there's time for little else. But I am committing to picking back up the instruments, designing clothing and leather stuff...teaching will not be the END OF ME!

Recently, I've been inspired to pick the "pen" (bka, QWERTY and keyboard) back up as I field discussions about love, heartbreak, almost daily (mostly through texts and regularly over coffee). I recently posted something on Facebook about women not settling for less and I had about 100 responses--amazing women (and men) are wanting to talk about love, dating, heartbreak, the "field"--and wanting to make sense of it all.

Lots has happened in my personal life since my last entry. I have a new pug--Chico Childress. He's so ugly, he's cute, and my friends allow him to get away with a lot out of sympathy for his horrible sinus issues and bad teeth.

I also am in an exclusive dating relationship. People ask how the 30 dates ended, and I guess I just never provided error analysis and conclusions (I'm a science teacher) with that whole social experiment. What people really want to know is if I'm dating someone. I am, actually. A result of the 30datesin30days? Kinda. I've known him for years, but I think the experiment may have been the catalyst. Am I gonna talk about him now? Nope. I'm generally quite private about a relationship, so, sorry. Not now. I can say that he's an amazing human being. His parents did a really good job in raising a really solid man, and people tell me he's HOT and has a great voice. One male friend called him "eye candy"--now I'm looking at that male friend out the corner of my eye.

The goodness of this man and conversations with my many friends about chronic singleness, disappointment, heartbreak, and anger as the result of abandonment, cheating, dishonesty, disrespect, and general immaturity inspired today's post. I had a stream of thoughts under the shower head as I belted out Jazzmine Sullivan's 10 seconds.

I realized a couple of things: 1) I REALLY love and see myself as part of the community of "gritty", raspy voiced, REAL R & B songstresses like Lauryn Hill, Mary J. Blige, and Jazzmine Sullivan (I guess Alicia Keys too but I'm still kinda mad at her) and 2) Black women love hard. (caveat: I recognize that women from other racial and cultural groups can love "hard" too--shout out to my girl Nicki who definitely has an honorary "sistah" card and some strong Latinas and Asians--my girl who will remain nameless as she has violent tendencies because of her fierce love) I am, however, going to talk exclusively about Black women in this post because we're the subgroup with the REPUTATION FOR BEING CRAZY.

I have concluded that black women are a "NOBLE CRAZY"--the result of loving "HARD". We are loyal as ISH--I mean loyal to the point of going to jail for our men. Our craziness is the result of trauma after trauma after trauma--making it through poverty, immigration (shout out to those of us from the Caribbean and the Continent, South and Central American diaspora), watching our "should be" lovers and husbands lost to violence, the streets, mental illness, drug abuse, etc, being seen as "less than beautiful" (we're only pretty if we're light skinned and don't have kinky, short hair), "making it" with degrees only to "educate ourselves out" of partners/husbands (because they didn't make it as far) and to have to deal with the subtle racism of co-workers who wonder WHY and HOW we made it. The list of traumas can go on--I haven't even touched the emotional, physical and mental abuse and trauma that is the result of the racial trauma we've experienced as a group in America. So, yes, we love hard as a result of the trauma. Our strength in prayers, the "attitude", the "fight" in us has kept our families going. And because we give SO incredibly much (often being the one who keeps the family together because of our men's debilitation), we get P I S S E D and BEYOND P I S S E D when we feel our love is disrespected, devalued, underappreciated, taken advantage of.

People label us as "crazy"--crazy enough to do what Jazzmine Sullivan confesses: "I bust the windows out your car...and though it did not mend my broken heart....". They say we have attitudes, but this crazy, attitudinal, boldness is just the result and summation of our fierce loyalty and love. TOO MUCH IS ALWAYS AT STAKE FOR THE BLACK WOMAN, AND STUFF IS ALWAYS AT RISK, so we just don't play...and many of us are perpetually at the "breaking point"--especially if we are "successful" (due to the isolation). We don't like disingenous people (and will call you out in a public meeting if we have to), we don't like "talk behind our backs" (be a woman and talk to me "face to face"), we don't like being deceived. We've already been through too much.

What I realized this morning is that beneath this "crazy", "hard" love, is the softest, kindest, most compassionate tenderness and love. We are all nurses. We nurse the wounded in our communties. We may cut you with our tongues, but that's just because we so passionately care (and have been wounded so much). I thought about Carmen this morning. Carmen actually rolled her eyes at me and cut me with some sharp remark when we first met at Corkery Elementary in Little Village. She had the classic black woman crazy attitude. Over the years, though, Carmen has become a close sister. At 5:30 this morning (Saturday), we were up talking about our students. She told me about a student who is living in a house with no electricity or gas (and it's January in Chicago). The boy was crying in class, literally crying. "My hands are just so cold." She took him in her office and rubbed lotion and warmth in his hands, while she softly said, "Aw, baby, is this better, buddha duddha, suga'" (My granddaddy used to make up words like this too). How many professional people would be so personal? This is how we love, though. DEEPLY. Our love is life and death to us. When you trod upon it, you're asking for a fight...or maybe to have the windows bust out your car. (though none of my biological sisters, my close friends, or I would ever let a man get under our skin enough to lose our couth and self control at this level).

Black women love hard. We just do. (of course there are exceptions, especially for those of us who have lost our dignity and agree to share men, to live as "bust downs", hoes, "chicken heads", etc). While our irreverent hair, the curves in our lips and hips, and sassy come backs are very tempting and attractive, only the mature and respectful man should dare approach. So if you are on some macho B.S. (we do like swag and strength--very different from "macho" though), a player, disrespectful, dumb acting donkey, don't even consider it. You may get the right one on the wrong day and be going to Aaron's Glass Repair on Archer...