The Hunting Liberalist

Remember this: To stay in one attitude for long is stifling.

Disclaimer: Read before you get your panties in a wad.

I never thought much of myself in the political arena. All the candidates seem lacking when I was at the ready to vote. I see members on social media that disdain a Liberalist. I wonder if they know what it truly means. Chumming the water with blood drives people crazy on the internet. Is it just another one of those Edward Cullen versus Jacob moments, where the onlooker has to pick a side for team somebody?

I thought of what it was to be a hunting Liberalist. I tried to fixate on the need by non-liberalist people to rigidly slot Liberalists into a tight definition. It doesn’t seem to matter. The argument is all about not finding solutions, more debates, who wins debates, and how rigidly we can hold people’s ideals and stances up to say, “Look here. You are drawing outside the lines again. That is not allowed.” I say open that box of crayons and gobble them down.

Progress does need order but progress also needs those people willing to move past a problem into a solution. Stagnation and failure to act will incite more suffering. When you have a vast population with varying opinions, the greater good has to prevail. When I state this, it is in the context of what is the core of the problem. Two issues of concern are the wording of sacred text and gun control.

Enter in: Bill Maher, Affleck, and the band of merry political argumentists.

I was watching the episode with Bill Maher and the Ben Affleck shenanigans. One of the questions or statements posed, if I am correct, was based around Liberalist inability to rectify a liberal's belief in freedom of religion when applied to an outside religion's sacred text. This sacred text incites murderous intent against a non-believe, which leads to death.

Then followers of said sacred text impose religious doctrine on a non-believe, as if the non-believe were a member of said religion yet didn’t know it. Thus giving followers religious right to judge, condemn, and murder a human being for breaking their religious doctrine. A religious doctrine said victim or non-believer is not interred into.

Using a sacred text given to you by a higher power, to bring order out of chaos and raise humanity up to commune with a God is found at the end of a knife. The hand wielding that knife kills for the justification of the Word. Purists, indeed.

I thought about Liberalism.

Liberalism is a political philosophy founded on the idea of liberty and equality. Liberals support ideas such as civil rights, freedom of press, free trade and freedom of religion. These are concepts writ in the Constitution.

Each man has a natural right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and property. I say here that when you buy a gun it is considered property. I have a right to my guns. Then there is the second amendment, which politicians and others want to re-interpret for their subsequent agendas.

The problem I believed Maher was pointing out was: in Liberalism, from an American standpoint, is that certain religions have sacred text stating the sanction of murder against another human being, follower or no, yet to be liberal is to support a religious groups right to hold sacred text as a justification to murder another. This stance is as literal as the purist idea of the Koran’s to kill people based on the word. There exists no other interpretation except the rigid boundaries of what is literally put forth.

I was watching the 700 Club. The commentator was stating his case against Islam and the sanctioned persecution, torture, and murder of Christians. I previously was doing a treatise on something from the bible and found this:

Leviticus 20:13 states, “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

The commentator was judging Islam for radical wordage and literal interpretation from a purist standpoint yet the sacred text used by this particular group states pretty much the same thing. The commentator seemed to be excusing the passive nature of the Christian application of dealing with the same wordage.

Here I illustrate how I can pick apart the literal information of Islam and Christianity much like Conservatives pick apart Liberalist thinking. “Quid pro Quo, Clarice.”

First one would need to acknowledge this situation exists. Any Christian can turn purist or extremist with the right rotten attitude.

If this were removed from the sacred text landscape, anyone taught such a thing would not have to bear the burden of hate, shame, or discrimination. I would think this would be showing love and compassion to someone that could enter into a heaven, if that is what you so believe. As a Christian or a believer in Allah, you have fulfilled a tenant of alleviating suffering instead of inflicting it. Love and forgiveness is the basis of religious doctrines. People ignore this.

I must admit here when I was on a googling rampage, this little ditty had 22 parallel versions of the same biblical quote. The bible has already been revised several times. Maybe we should rethink that murder-mayhem clause. I guess one could argue that to change one scripture or two would be blasphemous. Looks like it has made the rounds already.

The point I would make here is this:

There is nothing in Liberalism as a rigid doctrine that states a liberalist's has to embrace another's right to religious freedom, if that religion goes against your moral and ethical code by sanctioning religious murder. You can acknowledge the content of that religion but not support flawed doctrine. There is nothing wrong with stating your boundaries on what you will and will not support. If the group understands their behavior is causing harm and will not be tolerated, is to acknowledge their position in the global community. Nations need to grow up and put childish things aside, as does its people.

The offending religion can carry about its doctrines, either extreme or non-extreme but without the support of Liberalist thinking. At Liberalism's core there should be an inalienable right to protect your personal morals and ethics in the presence of another's view that is greatly flawed. There should also be the option of intervening on the part of a group or individual who is at the end of the knife.

There is the responsibility to not profile or stereotype followers of the sacred text in question. The glaring truth is: sacred text wording sanctions murder. To resolve this you would have to alter the sacred text. As a progressive society, not weighed down by conservative thought where religious doctrine is concerned, could look at this as a moment of trial. Does the creator, who gave humans free will, want sacred word used as a murder weapon? Does this make sense when paralleled with the mantra Thou Shall Not Kill? Is the trial really the Creator testing the follower with a choice? What weighs more for damnation, murder or being conscious of the Word? If you truly understand the sacred word, it is not the literal translation but the test.

I digress to Abraham offering his son Isaac up as a sacrifice. He could murder his son for God but no. He had a choice. He didn’t have to kill anyone. All he had to do was decide not to murder his son and find a better way; a better way being the main point here. You have choice. You can choose not to murder someone because of the sacred word. Neither God nor Allah wants his creations murdered in their name. To kill is to fail the spiritual test and God-Allah is known for his tests. You court damnation when you condemn another man.

Liberalism can be a forward thinking platform to politics and not rigidly tied to outdated dogmas. Liberalism should be an avenue to look at a problem, see where the weak spot is and plug the hole, not embrace every stupid thing in the name of freedom when it cast death on innocent people. Liberalism should also venture to be a revolving and alternating problem-solver that tries new things and moves society to a more efficient place while cause as little harm as possible. The founding fathers were liberal. The indigent people who supplied them with the ideas were probably liberal as well. The world will always change. People don’t want change because their idea of security is threatened. Things can only stay in one climate for so long, given the influences on it.

I don't consider myself a Liberal but when you apply the political definition I could be. I considered the argument for and against gun control, which is a hot mix of controversy in itself. I also reflected on my personal opinion. I have seen the online works of both sides. I wanted to take my time and look around to see where the solutions were, if any.

When I was thinking on gun control, I believe the issue is not the gun. Anything can be made into a weapon, as the truth goes. If someone wants to kill you they can find all kind of interesting ways to do it. I think of the board game Clue and Edward Gorey’s illustrations based on alphabets, people in cemeteries, and murderers hiding behind vases with assorted weapons. A good assassin could take you out with a paper clip if they wanted to.

I considered the school shootings.

Each one of these shooting incidents occurred because of the mental state of the person(s) doing the act.

Several problems present themselves here. The first problem is buying a gun with no requirement for a mental evaluation. The second problem is profiling to determine who might look like a mental risk and who does not. Third, the mental evaluation could be seen as incriminating, discriminatory, and could be considered private medical information in need of a subpoena. Fourth, when the purchased gun leaves with the owner it can end up in the hands of anyone. We go on the assumption the purchaser is using the gun solely for their purposes. I could go on.

I believe the core problem is anchored in society’s behavior to their fellow man, how we raise our children, the attitudes we pass on, the isolation, discrimination, exclusion, suppression, anger, resentment, suffering, and indifference to the infliction of pain while telling people to suck it up, hide their abuse, hide their feelings, not seek help, and be labeled a basket case or pariah because no one noticed when they start acting out or gave warning signs. The stigma with being honest about feeling cut off from society as a whole or even on the individual level can be deafening to some. As a society, we have been taught not to get involved, turn our backs, or look the other way. We stand and watch people burn all the time. We do nothing, feel like our hand are tied, and watch people die on a video. Somewhere in there we become addicted to the effect of a global violence. Society likes the feeling. People like being in each others faces raging with words, pushing, shoving, and getting nowhere. We stay in that bad relationship hoping one day it will get better but it never does as a whole, only in bits and pieces, here and there. It’s a form of suicide that never fulfills itself. Control and not being able to control vomits up wrath and war.

School can be a place filled with isolation for students. Things I saw were keeping up with the Jones, bad home training of students or lack thereof, not having proper counselors available to student when problems arose, teachers playing favorites, absentee parents due to work, and a form of communism. We’ve all been there with school cliques. You have the Goths, the Emo, the Plastics, the Yuppies, the Creatives, the Troublemakers, and God love the Nerd. These teenage groups can be as vicious as any animal out in the wild that can drag down a wildebeest. If there is a weak one in the herd, they identify that teenager then make its life miserable. I move on from bullying because it's torture.

Once this tortured mind starts to resent the treatment, especially when the teenager sees other people are immune to its infection, can devise all kinds of ways for retribution and revenge. Parents are so busy making a living they don’t introduce their children to consequences until rules are broken then the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. Children and teenagers are ignored because parents are too preoccupied with more important things.

Society doesn’t spend enough time psychologically nurturing children. This is left to parents who are at work for eight to twelve hours a day while the child is at school for eight hours.

There is no class that I know of in my son’s old school that teaches children how to deal with their issues by questioning the thought behind the emotion, challenging ideas which are just thoughts, nothing more, how to counteract the thought before it turns rancid, and re-establishing better ways to perceive and approach problems, feelings, or actions.

I say school here because if parents aren’t conscious of this teaching technique they are passing bad habits to their progeny. Worse yet, the parent may be in denial or resentful of the need to have better mental health.

People do use religious mores to teach each other but that is not always required. The biggest problem with people is they don’t know what to do, who to go to, or how to handle things. Once you have all this pressure on you, the cup runneth over.

Life has become about the debate, not solution options. It’s more important to chew the fat.

The world has not had a holy man or high profile prophet in a long time other than the Dali Lama. There is no new voice to say to the world, this sacred text needs editing. If such a person existed, that person would probably be stones or killed. I guess the Creator has to come up with a more subtle, creative way to get the point across.

There are thing I am sure of. A Cosmic Creator, human angels, and the cumulative voice of billions of people telling the ears of the world to change, to rethink their consciousness, and realize things are getting out of hand. If you want a prophet, those voices could be considered the Word of the Creator because of the magnitude. This is the singular voice from plural sources crying out against great wrongs. Listen to them for they shall not steer you wrong.

Written by: W Harley Bloodworth

~Courtesy of the AOFH~

Hunting: Vessels, and Vices.

Remember this: A huntress is no longer a free woman when enslaved to vices.

Post-operatively speaking, surgery can really work a girl over. Doing seventeen hour sleep-o-thons due to prescription painkillers can throw you off your game. Tallying those hours up made me think it might make Sleeping Beauty fabulous, add in anemia while waking up feeling and looking like road kill, is the exception to the rule. Losing big slots of time does bring concerns, but my medical results were negative.

While in my drug-induced recovery, I was doing a lot of kindergarten art. One of my favorite things to do is look at and interpret art. Going into a museum and focusing on the nuances, details, and hidden meanings make for a relaxing time for me.

While looking up this recipe for a French dish, I came across this book, which I have now lost the title to. I was wandering off into Greek cuisine, when I happened to wander off again into the hunting realm. In it's pages were the pictures of Greek vessels. I considered the images of the surface treatment. I studied the content, which I had seen before in a book at the library; a most risque book. Not quite as literal and detailed as Japanese work, but fairly simplistic in design. Maybe I am like Dean Winchester and I like my archaic porn.

For some time now, I have wanted to be inclusive of same-sex peoples in the realm of my hunting treatises. Usually, my writings are in the form of heterosexual speculations. I consider people humans first. Whatever they are into or do with other consenting adults in their private bedrooms or with their reproductive organs is not my business. Public sexy time photos from strangers are just muted. I move on silently into that good night.

I do take issue with sexual depravity when women, children, and animals are being violated against their will by strangers or familiar people, regardless of sexual orientation. Some of the content of these pieces do allude to this type of nefarious activity. I turn my vision to Canada and the problem of missing indigent tribes-women. I will not dwell on that subject. It is best to save it for later. Yet anyone reading this should look into this issue. It is a heartbreaking thing.

The vessels in question are called Attic Vases. These vessels either have orange backgrounds with black figures portrayed on the surface, or vice versa.

Male and female figures were engaged doing some activity. The gifting or exchange of deceased or living wildlife leaped out at me more so than the naughty, implied sexual behavior. Images of the fox, a stag, bird, or animal skin are being gifted, traded, or paid to another individual for some purpose. The images are limited. Therefore the interpretation could be limited as well.

Figures are shown handing a dead fox to another male or female. One figure is illustrated with a dead stag on his shoulders. There is an assortment of farm animals delivered. Another interpretation of the image of the fox is as a living pet gifted to the receiver.

When considering the recipient, the individual could be a relative, a consort, a concubine, a prostitute, or lover. When it gets into the realm of sexual positions and amorous postures, we know what that means. On one hand, there is the possibility these recipients are people who do not or can not hunt for some reason.

When you look at the rationale of the image, hunting was not exclusively performed to provide food for the hunter's table. Hunting became a non-monetary system to purchase or trade for sex.

I could see where this is a kill three birds with one stone trick. Hunter kills two stag, eats one or takes it to the wife, and then pays a sex worker for some sexy time action with the second. Everyone is happy.

I began to chuckle a little because the images reminded me of the movie, The Best Little Whore House in Texas. Dolly Parton's character, Miss Mona Stangely, is running the Chicken Ranch. The Chicken Ranch is a brothel, where football players go to fulfill their sexual desires. The mode of exchange in the Chicken Ranch's history was exchanging fowl for fortification.

These vessels illustrate Greek daily life through snapshot imagery based on concepts such as hunting, folklore, and sexuality. More so, the interaction between each activity as it applies to Greek daily life.

To interject here, I have constructed my personal vessels from home-made and commercial clays. You take great care in the selection of the treatment and imagery that is to be applied to the surface. You are always thinking in terms, when fabricating sell-able items, of the consumer. This treatment is what gives the vessel its value along with the silhouette.

When considering the use of such an artifact, these vessels could be used during ceremonies, as home utility vessels for the purposes of cooking and storage, humorous gag-gifts, or specifically made for some purpose known only to the person commissioning the work.

The idea of how publicly these vessels were displayed became an interesting turn of events. When you consider in years past, the event of LGBT peoples closeting themselves to avoid persecution, here same-sex relationships are proudly displayed and shipped out to other places as an exported trade-good during the 5^th century. These vessels were popular and being produced in Italy.

Could the mindset, in regards to these same-sex shenanigans, be so open and liberal?

I thought of the rampant sex trade of today. Women, men, and children are used as vessels of trade for money. Victims of a form of capitalism in underbelly slums, off-shore yachts, high-profile call girls and al la carte objects on someone's lavish lifestyle procurement request list. Beware of those procurement people. You are just an item that will make them money because they think everyone and everything has their price.

Here it is 2014 and same-sex couples are finally getting the right to legally marry their partners. I asked myself: What happened? How did the human timeline travel from having same-sex relationships as acceptable enough to put on a vase, to threatening people with persecution if they dared state the truth about their sexual orientation?

There is no stigma attached to the vessels that is known. Maybe it is known yet I haven't seen a scholarly review of the details. This might have changed with the advent of Christianity and doctrines raging against same-sex participants.

These vessels have become image documents testifying to the role of hunting in sex-based trade activities. It also displays the role of hunting in the relationship of heterosexual and LGBT hunting participants. The vessels also indicate hunting participants as participating in same-sex relations. Even if there was no love and the motive was sexual pleasure, the sexual orientation of the partner didn't matter, only the consenting decision. Sexual satisfaction was the ultimate goal. I would have to argue the point in a humorous fashion of a hunter going to a sex worker and saying, “Hold me. I want to be held.”

Hunting purchased you sexy time. This sexy time could be void of emotional attachment and based solely around vice and physical pleasure.

Taking liberties here, how do these artifacts from the past, when applied to the current landscape of hunting, indicate a change in societies view of hunting participants' representation of sexuality in the field sports? In terms of gender roles, does it really matter what you do with your partner or partners under the sheets or in the woods? When hunting does it matter if you are heterosexual, homosexual, trans-sexual, or bisexual? Why was same-sex relationships more acceptable in the 5^th century and not now in some countries?

I was going for the obvious, albeit comical. Of course, these are all negative bullet point. Possible hunting for sex trade-offs could be:

Hunting participants posting the sexiest photo of themselves online publicly to catch the eye of a male or female hunter. This could ensue to long-term or short-term sexy time.

Hunting participants posting all but nude, or nude photos of themselves, to agitate the male-female glands to get money and recognition in lieu of online peepshow through self-exploitation.

Posting all your expensive toys to show people how much you have, because money is everything. Who cares if they like you, for you? If you have money, you can pick and choose to whom you choose the sexy time, discard, and move on.

Hunting participants can involve themselves in relationships with other hunters or people who have access to prime hunting areas for sexual trade. Who cares if the sex is bad as long as you get a good hunting spot? When hunting season ends, move on.

Hunting participants who are dating and married come home with said quarry and expect dinner, a movie, and sexy time because it is there legal right, by God. No spouse shall block the sexy time.

Getting past these points, the question of same-sex in hunting reoccurs to me from a heterosexual vantage point.

When you consider the alpha-male's position of hunting as a purely male, testosterone driven sport, where the wimps cry and run home to mama while the bearded men with the most balls prevail, where does the LGBT fit in? Where would a LGBT fit in to the alpha-male hunter, who finds other hunters as puny, inferior beings, playing in his hunting sandbox?

When the viewer considers the older and newer perspective on hunting participants, it is heterosexual in nature. It seems to appear in advertising. When you see an advertisement for the hunter of today, you would probably see a heterosexual couple with children, a single parent with a child, or a singleton with no progeny.

The patriarch or matriarch is assumed to be heterosexual. These images can be seen on social media and in memes, but the image itself can be misleading in its content.

How do we know the sexual orientation of the hunting participants? Is it implied or assumed? Do we not question the relationships in the advertised photos? We use our greatest point of reference, which is our personal view of our own sexuality. I am heterosexual, therefore they are heterosexual. If this is so then how does a LGBT, interpret what is a heterosexually implied image?

Here the viewer could understand sexual orientation and sexuality to be relative in hunting. Perception change from society to society, given their acceptance or a societies limited and oft times murderous contempt for such sexual activities.

If you are a LGBT, when you go into the woods to hunt no one cares what your sexuality is. There is no question to indicate your sexuality on a hunting license to be used for discriminatory purposes.

As for advertisements, when the eventual shift begins by understanding LGBT are consumers too, the images will become more ambiguous. It is unrealistic to think that all imagery will be presented in vague ways. Let us hope that more people who are use to the heterosexual condition will realize the slight that is being handed down to our fellow hunter and soften the suffering of the human condition. LGBT are not little aliens that have arrived on the heterosexual landscape. I would not think they cared what heterosexuals do but would appreciate a little consideration and representation as consumers and participants in all arenas of life. When you stop segregating people with issues made to exclude, then life is filled with less anxiety. The people move on from the controversy that disrupts everyone's life.

As for LGBT, there is not much to understand. They pay taxes, vote, adhere to the same laws as everyone else and are not a different species. If people want to throw the Word of God at them, those religious people should remember that their God is the ultimate judge. Not them.

Otherwise, sexual orientation does not matter in hunting or outdoor sports. If it does, it is because of the prejudice of a human being with flawed beliefs. Regardless of sexual orientation, people will choose to be cruel or kind for whatever reason. It doesn't seem to matter.

Written by: W Harley Bloodworth.

~Courtesy of the AOFH~

Icons

Remember this: Objects in side mirrors may be closer than they appear.

The word icon floated on the radar in the world of hunting, as a bleep here and a bleep there. This word is attached to males in conversation, when referring to other male hunters they hold in high esteem and people of history past. There are some females working on situating themselves as icons, even with a negative stigma.

I said the word icon suspiciously. It conjured up paintings I admired at a local museum. Beautiful, gold treated iconoclastic images centered around religious themes. The Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, the Virgin Mary, the cross, the bible, angels, devils, and the Word. The grim reaper is an icon of death but don't fear him.

Madonna, Warhol, Mickey Mouse, buffalo, and Cobra Commander are all icons of some sort.

I researched people considered hunting icons, yet all I saw were current faces questing to find glory. Truth be told, I have no icon of hunting that I look up to. I find some of them highly entertaining but not because of the hunting.

I realized after exploring this word, it can be representative of some image, idea, or person with no religious context. This image could represent two different objects in reality, yet share a metaphoric meaning or symbolism. Icon could also be interchanged with the word idol. An easy example is apple pie. Apple pie is a dessert with apples and pastry. Others consider it a metaphor for the American dream, where it's a comfort and everyone can enjoy a slice of the pie. All that from pie.

I began to square on the difference between historical and current would-be icons. Daniel Boone and Theodore Roosevelt are considered icons of hunting and conservation. These individuals are placed on a pedestal of reverence because of achievements and lifestyles. Work ethic could be relevant to their placement as icons. As people, we tend to look up to people we would like to emulate and pattern our lives after. If it worked for them, why not ourselves?

Boone performed a lot of acts of utility to push progress forward, not to find fame. The mindset is completely different than it was then and is now. Now it is a different kind of agenda being pushed. The Wilderness is in outer space. People want to be icons for fame and fortune. There might be some level of putting back into the system as a balance to greed and vanity.

I reflect on Steven Rinella's fascination for Daniel Boone as an icon. He clearly holds Boone up as a measuring stick. I am not judging but pointing out the obvious. There are other hunters that hold Ernest Hemingway up as an icon. In other countries, the person changes but the sport doesn't. Icons are everywhere and in no short supply.  At least Rinella does do informative media that brings information to the public where issues of public lands, conservation, cooking and different points of view. Excluding Rinella,  it's hard to find a hunting celebrity that isn't sporting pretentiousness.

I considered Roosevelt. He is everywhere on social media. His ghost will never die. Roosevelt realized progress was destructive and decided it needed to be pushed back or lose it all. His mindset came from problems, solutions, desires, and necessity.

These two particular men did not set out to fixate themselves into the minds of a nation as icons. They were simple men working toward goals and their stories were picked up and carried far and wide as legend. In Roosevelt's case, he was already high-profile due to his political shenanigans. Boone was just all over the place on greet and meets in the wilderness. Spin doctors of research could manipulate content and rewrite the way a person is represented to push the capitalist machine. It is seen in media today as mediocre drama and reality television.

Boone and Roosevelt didn't have publicists, lawyers, agents, and a group of people online researching the trending topics to keep them relevant. They didn't have online battles with strangers to fuel causes or the hashtag. They did honest to God work. In today's world, there is no end to the amount of information that can help you build a campaign to promote yourself or something else. There was no Go-Pro to track and record their every movement then upload to the internet.

All you have to do is decide you want to be famous then find someone to plot your course, make pivotal decisions to your image, produce quality product and you are on your way. I do interject here that you would need to recruit someone to hide the bodies as well. The biggest coup is getting the majority vote by popularity, not competency in actually doing the job. When I say job, I do not mean the manipulation of information in a documentary of hunting when the truth is far from the fiction of it all.

I was reading this:

“the soul's reduction to the sheer minerality of an image entailed the elimination of man's highest quality: rationality. The image is “dead”: the icon is idol. The formula depends upon the confusion between the material and formal aspects of the icon: such is , of course, the question of all visual mediation of the concept realm without the added complication of the relations between the sacred and the secular.” ( Weiss 18)

I reflected on hunters that were referred to as icons by their peers. To be honest, I didn't see them as icons or famous. If you have a cult following, you could become an icon to them but not to everyone in the world. This application of the word icon is limited to a pool of people that recognize you as such, not that you fully deserve it worldwide. It does become a little disturbing when it borders on idol worship.  

Does a person looking up to an icon ever surpass the icon and place themselves in the icon's role? Is this the goal ? Are you really competing with an image defined by deeds or misconception of the icon's true reality? How does one compete with dead people?

People can determine for themselves if they are worthy in a pursuit. You don't need to have an icon to do great deeds. Recently, I viewed Leonardo Dicaprio giving a speech to the UN as the Messenger of Peace. He wasn't gunning to become an icon in the arena of Climate Change activism. He merely wanted to point out a truth and incite the people of the world to be morally responsible for our home, each other, and living things that can't make these kinds of decisions to act.  He has moved himself from actor to world advocate in several shorts moves of the global chessboard. It wasn't because he was plotting and planning greatness but the motivator behind the actions.

Moving people to care for their ecosystems is right up there with life and death.  This is critical thought and coming to some truth you can't look away from.  Not I want to be famous, because he already is. There is nothing wrong with finding some meaning in life. To bad we can't have this quality of person running for the presidency. Right now, we are coming up craps in the candidate department.  Scientists, where are you?

I will also say here, as hunters, even though DiCaprio or  Somerhalder doesn't probably approve of the hunting lifestyle, we should put this aside and support this Climate Change endeavor. It does affect those components that hunting is made up of. Humans, animals, ecosystem, and life in general are affected, so why would we not get behind this concept? I always try to find a point where I can arguing that it is a bigger thing for me to put aside differences and find that one thing in common to jusitify doing something. Even if that one thing is because it is the right thing and only thing to do.

Once again, here is another famous face, Ian Somerhalder. He was designated a UNEP Global Ambassador and has been working with the United Nations Environmental Program.  He has spoken before Congress and in Barbados on the plight of animal species, environmentalism, and the need to make better choices when dealing with out use or abuse of the planet's resources.

Yes, these are celebrities but the younger generation can be influenced by the right idea regardless of the person. Parents should get more involved with these ideas to better our world, alleviate suffering, and treat our fellow main in more respectful ways.

I do believe an outlet for people to stand up for such things should be generated to open public dialogue to these issues, instead of forcing people to take to the streets to show they are serious about issues.

Getting back on topic. 

Competition does drive some people on to out do another, even if that other person is dead. There is a constant running of the rails, as in horse racing, where once pointed down the track, at the sound of the bell, you find the finish line and the winner's circle. Is this at the expense of a fractured leg? Who knows. One must try anyway without completely trying to kill yourself or someone else.

I am not saying one should never have role models. Icons are role models under the label icon. Should one be the very best they can be without using someone else's accomplishments as a meter stick ? Yes. I do believe that your shenanigans and word of mouth can increase your chances of becoming a famous or infamous icon. If you are going to elevate a person or thing to icon status, it should at least have a truthful, unselfish concept driving it. Otherwise, it is as shallow as the meaning or motive placed upon or driving it. It should never be because someone pointed you out as the icon of something to make you famous.

~Courtesy of the AOFH~

Literature cited:

Weiss, Allan S. Perverse Desire and the Ambiguous Icon. State University of New York, Albany. 1994. Print. pp. 18

For links:
http://www.unep.org/wed/ The United Nations Enviroment Program.

http://www.leonardodicaprio.com/ Leonardo DiCaprio

http://www.isfoundation.com/welcome Ian Somerhalder Foundation

The Label Makers of Skill.

Remember this: Do not stick your finger in the fire. It hurts.

When you are born you are a blank slate for someone else to write all over. You learn your parents chosen religion perhaps. You look at Vogue to figure out what clothes to wear. Your father may even be the one to teach you how to put makeup on.  Watch an adult on how to act for good or bad. Stick your finger in a fire on the gas stove until you realize this hurts. No one ever remembers the moment when the idea they were not who they were at that moment began. We just know that someone told us when we reached a certain age, we were suppose to become something. What this something is remained to be seen.

We get introduced to the idea of destiny and fate. We also get introduced to the idea of whether the glass is half full or half empty. There might not be a reason for any of this, but the concept that existence and reality, even if a mere illusion of the mind is mind-blowing.

You might have to pick a wife or a husband. Decide how many children you want. What career you want to pursue. After you exist in these identities for several years that may be how you define yourself.

At some point in a life, the identity we wear could come in the form of an employer preaching to us that we 'must wear many hats'. All of these hats were written about in books that are intended to groom the employee into a certain mold of agreeable manageability. This is for packaging where public consumption is concerned.

You go to a job, learn the skills but eventually everyone you meet who knows about you refers to you as 'the person that works as the hamburger tosser', or the 'writer for South by Southwest' but never who you actually are. People are not concerned about the center of your being in jobs. Consumers and employers just want you to do the work, be loyal solely to their business while you watch their glory grow in conjunction with being paid poorly for manual labor. Eventually to be discarded no matter how good a job you've done because the employer wants to get with the times or go with the newest self help book for business.

The same thing about identity can be said if you are always referred to as Tom's wife, Todd's sister, or that white lady that walks up and down the road. Your identity in regards to how other see you is not about who you are, but what you may do, who or what they equate with you, or whatever gossip is being spread down at the local churches.

People do not extend themselves past these outward identities that are subjective. Without realizing, you eventually start doing the same thing to yourself. You are the worker. Work gets you through. Work takes away all the negative things in your life by putting you in a place where you don't have to deal with the bad. Work hides you. You hide in work. If you were to lose work and money....where does life go for you?

Anxiety, the unknown, and the worst possible scenario given your mentality at the time.

When you finally hit the bottom of the trash can you realize there is bacteria living there. You are really not as low as it gets. There is always the ground outside the can itself. It's never really as bad as it could be.

People you come across will try to label you in the way of the Artista, the Shy Person, the Asshole, the Weird Old Lady Pushing the Grocery Cart, or 'that annoying person' because it makes them feel more at easy with putting you in a slot, then moving on. Nothing special there. You are weighed with some value that only they internalize but could be untrue when actually applied to you.

When it comes to your thinking, you either think positive or negative about yourself, then act accordingly. If you lose everything and fall down in a ditch thinking your life has ended then you didn't have your identity prioritized in a healthy way. You change jobs. Your job is not you even though employers would like your job identity to consume you so you will give them better work...which is far from the truth.

If you were to lose everything today....you would still be you. Nothing would change other than your financial situation which is not your identity. If your husband or wife left you, you would still be you. You are not their appendage. You did not merge by osmosis into their person or become a part of their psyche.

I was watching Life of Pi by Yann Martel this evening. There was a moment when the older main character Pi Patel says, "Even when God seemed to have abandoned me, he was watching. Even when he seemed indifferent to my suffering he was watching. And when I was beyond all hope of saving, he gave me rest. Then he gave me a sign to continue my journey."

The Profane can be found everywhere if you are open to receiving the lesson. You can read a 5000 word book, view a surrealist painting, or watch light hit the dew collected on the side of the road like a thousand diamonds. If you are open to what you see, read, hear, feel, or even taste that is what makes all the difference in the quality of your Soul.

Meaningful things are quite unextraordinary if looked upon with indifference. The universe is watching at all times, if you are good or bad, it doesn't matter. The Universe will construct itself around your Soul; tailor made to drive you to that state of being where you find actualization for all things in your existence. The more you fight the Universe the more it struggles to right itself and your life.

As for your identity.....you never actually lose it. You can't see it for all the other garbage you covered it up with. Take a spiritual bath....it does wonders.

Define yourself by your skill not your label.

~Courtesy of the AOFH~

ps...this has nothing to do with hunting. *hiccup*



Work Cited:
Life of Pi. Dir. Ang Lee. Writer. Yann Martel. DVD Fox 2000 Pictures, 21 Nov 2012

Identity

Remember this: Your identity is who you innately are. An activity is something you perform, or take part in.

As of today, I have not purchased my hunting license. The weather has been wet with a barrage of red bugs and mosquitoes. I have not seen deer or heard gunshots. There is just this uneasy feeling within me akin to something missing. My way of dealing with these emotions are to revert to nonchalance and caring less. I was in a pickle.

Is it my aversion to not wanting another bad experience? Who doesn't?

I wished I could purge what truly plagues me right now, but this wouldn't be a prudent thing. It is just the offending thorn in my paw and a problem I wish would finally resolve itself.

Lately, I have seen posts where several people reported their hunting was hindered for various reasons. When I examined people who were not experiencing this issue, there was an undertone concept underlining the attitude. I reflected on myself and other hunters.

What people identify with in terms of the self was a mystery I was toying with when it comes to hunters. Identity seems to be a mysterious woman that comes and goes with no clues left behind. Only a glass with lipstick or a photo of a woman with shades. Who or what is it? Why can it seemingly disappear, then when the truth illuminates it, a clearer image emerges with even more complicated or simplistic definitions. Mirrors are not even able to distinguish between the truth and the image. The truth lurks down in the recesses of the mind. A card catalog of life events, with meanings, distortions, revelations, and lies. Illusions dress it up and enshroud it in half-truths until the glass breaks and then an ooze drips from the fractures to reveal a hostage of expectation.

Whether it is a truth of yours or not, you will see proclamations from other hunters that hunting is their life's blood. For some, it is their secondary religion. I believe in good gourmet chocolate, heathen that I am. Others prostrate to their followers it is their passion or soul's glue; without it they are nothing. This is done to the disregard of other people whom are just as passionate, if not more so. Followers flock to these types, I would think, because of the shared ideal of complete submersion in an activity's elevation to something more than it is. These followers mimic the patterns of the person they are enamored with and will protect and fight for the stranger with a shared ideal of hunting.

The practice of emulating other hunters that are elevated by social media, endeavors, television, and writings is not a bad thing, as long as it doesn't harm the person's psyche. Hunters of the world can vary in their personal identities. Followers can mimic the object of their affection or idolatry. When you begin to take on another person's identity as your own, when it is not you, should be given great reflection, experimentation in your personal likes and dislikes, and branching out on your own without the influence of a stranger you do not know. Illusions are conjured all the time by less than experienced magicians.

I started examining one of my truths of identity. A truth is something that is a fact and part of your reality even if other people do not like it. It is not for others to like it but to acknowledge your truth.

In 2007, I lost everything maintained by the material world. Like a slow growing moss, I didn't realize how these problems bled into my non-material realm. A series of events after one prayer, ended in more disaster than one could ask for. I was a job title without a name, working for a greatly flawed pillar of the community. I was killing myself at a hard labor job to support my child with no public assistance, child support, or significant other. This didn't make me better or worse than anyone else because all people have their sufferings. It just is what it is. You have to cope because functioning is not an outlet. I do the work and reflect more on my inner self. I forgot myself instead of lost myself. Being so busy ,you pass yourself. Passing yourself is not a good thing.

There are also people that will attempt to turn you into a good little soldier for their benefit. You come out looking like a pod person from the planet Mars that repeats the same thing ad nauseum. Take me to your leader; take me to your leader.

Long periods of extreme, even pressure will do odd things to a human mind. Consider Elk. Creatures do strange and almost epic things under pressure thereby astonishing people when their truth is discovered or spoken.

Here I will interject, it is not the fact that you can't be a single parent with a child and not support yourself. It is the grueling, non-supported wear it takes on your energy and psyche when you realize that there is nothing and no one to help you. If you can't stay afloat, there are some that will lend you a hand and some willing to step on your fingers to watch you drown while they laugh. Others believe it is a warranted punishment for some sin you must or have commited, when in fact it is the residue of cause and effect.

Everyone needs support, even people you dislike and dislike you. Being spiteful is counterproductive and a waste of effort. My support came in the form of a suggestion by my therapist at the time. She tasked me with trying different things regardless of whether they failed or not. I was to build or construct something representative of an aspect of myself or something I was doing. If I were to hold up a picture of something for the world to see, what would it be? Would they understand it? It didn't matter if the world cared, as long as I did.

Of course, there were people that had no clue to this. They only look at the superficial, while having no intentions of forming any kind of short or long term bond with you. There were times other peoples' behavior almost made me reel against my creation. I would destroy it and start over while  never getting anywhere.  I finally decided to pull the bandage off while ripping away the scab of things. New scabs form. Life is a progression like that.

People displace off onto the nearest or what they consider the strongest person. You've proven yourself able to take it; whatever it is. We look at others as indestructible when they are borderline disasters waiting to happen. What if you have reached your threshold for worldly poisons? A human body and soul does have it's limits. That limit, when reached, has to dissipate of it's own accord. We place things on ourselves and other people that shouldn't be there, especially long term.

Due to this life event, I spent several months in therapy suffering from other long standing problems and identity loss. I loved my work in veterinary medicine so much that I took a hit when I was no longer in that field of employ. I suffered some trauma as well due to an accident not of my making. I look back now and realized I missed the diagnostics, the procedures, the patients, clients, and the distraction most of all. Work saw me through any hurtful problem by distracting me from things I could not control. The quality and quantity of my capabilities were centered around medicine of some sort. I took great pride in my work, how people appreciated that I cared, and my ability to move forward even in an emergency situation. I learned how to cut through the crap and find the real problem. Ergo, the solution at hand.

When my son graduated, I wanted to do something for myself. I wanted to do one hunt and then call it quits because I was limited, which is okay. I was talking to this nice hunt broker and mentioned it to him. He asked me did I have amnesia, which will tell you how under the radar this problem is. Identity loss doesn't indicate you are crazy, you just identified with an inappropriate activity. Veterinary medicine was an activity I took part in. It wasn't who I was. After veterinary medicine left, I was still present. I didn't go away, the work did.

It is the same with hunting. You are no more or less a person when you are not participating directly in the sport. Again, there are hunting participants that yodel how they want to be inclusive, then when pressed you learn they aren't really going to do that.  They can't be caught looking bad either; reputation and all. You find other things to do that will bring you just as much joy. This predicament could also put you on the path of something you can love just as much. Enrichment can come from many different sources. As humans, we need to be viable and active.

It could or could not be hard, when we see other people endeavoring in a sport that we no longer can participate in. A truth here is: if you are lucky then things do not stay the same forever. At some point, the tide will turn for your benefit or against it. Either way, in the long run you will see the wisdom of the thing that blocks you, if you give it a chance.

I then reflected on my non-participation. I could wait it out until it gets cooler to avoid the bugs then see what happens. I could also let other people have their turn at a deer. I could spend sometime not staying in the woods isolating myself and actually speak to other human beings. I could do a lot of things. Once you realize your time is now open to doing something else, you could accomplish all kinds of things. Not hunting, is not the end of the world. It is just a temporary chapter in your life or an avenue to do something just as important.

If you have ever felt you have lost something intangible that you considered a part of yourself, think again. If you see someone that might be having difficulty, in a nice respectful way, offer some help with no pressure. Sometimes they just want to know you actually acknowledge their existence.

Building a new identity should be given great care. Completely stealing another person's will not last because it is not you. It is theirs. Selecting the parts of your identity should be given as much scrutiny as you would if you were buying expensive haute couture.  Resurrecting or building a new identity takes a lot of patience and asking  yourself the questions that hurt you the most then finding answers. Other peoples' suggestions on what they think you are should be taken into consideration, but ultimately you are the decision-maker on your innards and outtards. Be brave but be truthful with yourself.

Do not be discouraged because you are not like everyone else. That is the beauty of it. You are not. Go forth and be different if you want.

As for me, hunting is an activity I take part in. It is not who I am, it is something I do. I can't expect others to agree with this. That is their path. My truth is much deeper than hunting yet hunting helps me to visit that place where it exists. I am quite happy with that.

Explore who you are, could be, and will be. Your life is short but there are many hours in it. Those hours could be spent creating, constructing, and implementing a grand design for yourself that speaks of you to others. Why would you wear the outer shell of someone else?

~Courtesy of the AOFH~