Sexual Objectification Part 3 (Advertising)

                                       Sexual Objectification and the media

                                                     Part 3 of series

     The relationship between the body and sex is unambiguously portrayed in contemporary media. Conforming to a thin body ideal is crucial to sexual attractiveness. Sexually objectifying images of women can be regularly viewed across all types of media from their music and the barrage of images available via the Internet to TV programs and movies they watch and magazines they read.

     Although influences on self-objectification might include a variety of interpersonal, social, cultural, and even biological factors, an aggressive purveyor of sexual objectification is undoubtedly the mass media.

     Women’s magazine covers often place weight loss messages next to messages about one’s sex life, implying weight loss will lead to a better sex life. They combine articles about weight loss with tips to keep your marriage hot. Stay skinny articles linked with ‘‘What Men Want Most’’ on their covers. Moreover, teen and women’s magazines regularly feature articles on attracting the opposite sex interspersed with advertisements for beauty care products and fashion merchandise. Finally, in television shows popular with adolescents, the most common sexual theme is that women are judged as romantic or sexual partners based on their physical appearance.

    Cultivation theory purports that television teaches audiences to adopt certain ‘‘cultivated’’ views of the world around them, the current study predicts that sexually objectifying media content can teach audiences to adopt a certain perspective of the self, one that places primary importance on physical appearance (Harrison & Fredrickson, 2003).

      Extensive research has demonstrated the negative results of female objectification in the media. Depression, appearance anxiety, body shame, sexual dysfunction, and eating disorders are only a few among the growing list of repercussions (Fredrickson & Noll, 1997).

     Kilbourne (2002) pointed out that advertising is a 100 billion dollar a year industry. Each day we are exposed to more than 2000 ads. Advertising can be one of the most powerful sources of education in our society. Many women feel pressured to conform to the beauty standards of our culture and are willing to go to great lengths to manipulate and change their faces and bodies.

     Kilbourne suggests that women are conditioned to view their faces as masks and their bodies as objects. Through the mass media, women discover that their bodies and faces are in need of alteration, augmentation, and disguise.

     In addition, women are taught to internalize an observer’s perspective of their own bodies. This phenomenon is called objectification (Fredrickson & Noll, 1997).

     Advertisements are loaded with objectified women, and only recently have the effects of objectification been explored. However, the effects of the dismemberment of women in advertising have been neglected.

     Dismemberment advertisements highlight one part of a woman’s body while ignoring all the other parts of her body. Dismemberment ads portray women with missing appendages or substitute appendages.

     Kilbourne (2002) suggested that the dismemberment of women is a monstrous problem in advertising. Dismemberment ads focus on one part of the body, e.g., a woman’s breasts. Typically, dismemberment ads employ female body parts for the purpose of selling a product. Dismemberment ads promote the idea of separate entities.

     These ads overtly and covertly encourage a woman to view her body as many individual pieces rather than a whole. Dismemberment ads leave many women feeling that their entire body is spoiled on account of one less than perfect feature. If a woman has less than satisfactory legs, then her potential for beauty is spoiled.

      In other words, if every body part is not flawless, then the possibility for beauty is ruined. As previously mentioned, girls and women are conditioned from a young age to view the body as a “work in progress” or something in constant need of alteration. Instead of being satisfied with their body as a whole, they concentrate on what separate entities they lack. Many women compare their bodies and sexuality to the eroticized images that are plastered on billboards and television and in magazines and movies (Kilbourne, 2002).

     Self-objectification largely stems from what we see in advertisement. Publishers use magazines to influence society's expectations for beauty, popularity, and fashion. A recent cover of Cosmopolitan, shows the guide to perfection. The idea of "perfection" is shown in the airbrushed model and "how to" guides the magazine headlines. First off, the model on the cover is seen in a red dress that shows that she has a very slim body and emphasizes her hourglass figure. Unlike most women in society, this model has no blemishes, no fat on her body, and has perfect hair. She is seen as flawless and perfect. These types of models have always been the face of magazines like Cosmopolitan, and will continue to be as long as they attract subscribers. The models are chosen to set the standard of what beautiful and sexy is. It can be assumed that the purpose of this magazine is to guide ordinary, average women into the ideal women that they should be.

     The headlines of the top articles say a lot about the magazine as well. "15 Things All Girls Need to Learn to Do" is one of the top stories that show the nature of the magazine. The wording in the title is very demanding. The word "need" shouts out to the audience as a demand; if they don't do these certain things there will be repercussions. This idea of having to act in a certain way or do certain things in order to be a girl shows how influential the media can be on society. The readers of Cosmopolitan, for example, are being told how to live their life without them realizing the demands given to them. They see images and subconsciously think that in order for them to be beautiful they need to act and look a certain way. The models are an example of this perfection that should be achieved by all women.

     The centerfold syndrome is defined by five principal characteristics: voyeurism, objectification, trophyism, the need for validation, and the fear of true intimacy. Brooks mentioned several possible causes of the centerfold syndrome such as biology, instinct, and survival of the fittest. However, it is exceptionally interesting to note that of all the possibilities mentioned, Brooks found the socio-cultural explanation to be the most probable.

     Brooks claimed that the centerfold syndrome is a product of the way in which men have been taught to think about and experience relationships, intimacy, and sex. The widespread sexualization of women in our culture easily lends itself to the adoption of the Centerfold Syndrome.

     Men are not the only ones who have adopted this harmful attitude towards relationships, intimacy, and sex. Women can just as easily adopt a negative self-image and attitude, perpetuating the negative stereotypes about women, sexuality, intimacy, and relationships (Brooks, 1995).

     The problem is not that media is showing these objectifying images; the problem is that people see those images and then start to see themselves as nothing other than a sex-object. She adds that there wouldn't be a problem if society knew to separate what they see from how they see themselves. Having your self-esteem based only your physical appearance rather than your intelligence or personality is the underlining problem. People need to see themselves as human beings and not objects. If they believe that all they are is an object and act like an object, the result is that society will see them as the object that they are portraying.

     Change can happen if people can try to make the conscious decision every day to promote themselves as a human with thoughts and feelings rather than an object to be used. The way society can start to "dis-objectify" itself is to look behind the images you are seeing and trying to see the underlining story of the person in the image.

The Sexy Lie February 9, 2014 by Caroline Heldman:

    Heldman doesn't just describe to her audience what sexual objectification is but she also gives her plan of action to provide knowledge on the topic and hopefully fix it. Heldman splits up her solutions into two categories, personal and political action plans. Heldman's personal plan of action is also split into girl and boy action plans. The girl action plan included, "stop consuming damaging materials, stop competing with other women, and stop seeking attention for your body".

     The boy action plan included, "be a supportive ally, don't evaluate girls/women based on appearance, and speak out against objectification". Both of these action plans are ones that can be done on an individual basis and by any age. This is important because this speech is aimed at youth in the country and they need to be able to have the option to make a difference. If the action plan they are given isn't possible for them to do, it will only lead to discouragement.

     Heldman also includes a political action to help aid in change. This action plan includes,"boycott objectifying media, contact media producers, produce your own media, and new media activism".

An excerpt from her show:

“Good afternoon. Are we having a transformative afternoon so far? Let’s hear it. Well, I am here today to talk about a lie, in specific, a sexy lie. I know there are lots of lies. Some of them are sexy, some of them are very unsexy.

I’d like to talk about specifically about the lie or the idea that being a sex object is empowering. I’d like to convince you that it is not empowering, first, by talking about what’s sexual objectification is, and then moving on to theoretical and data driven analysis of why it’s damaging. Lastly, provide you a plan of action, so that you can both navigate objectification culture, and change objectification culture. Let’s jump right in.

What is sexual objectification? It’s the process of representing or treating a person like a sex object, one that serves another sexual pleasure. What’s so interesting about sexual objectification is we used to have a vocabulary for it.

In the 60’s and 70’s, we were concerned about sexual objectification and its harm on girls and women. In the 80’s, 90’s, and today, we’ve actually been relatively quiet when it comes to public discourse. Even though our sexual objectification culture is more amplified, we see more images, and 96% of them are female of sexually objectified bodies. We don’t have a vocabulary to talk about it. In fact, young people I think have even mostly lost the ability to identify it.

--

New objectification culture has emerged in the past 10 years, and it’s marked by two things. One is an increase in the number of sexually objectifying ads in television, movies, videogames, music videos, magazines, and other mediums. The second advertising component is that the images have become more extreme, more hyper sexualized.

Why are we experiencing this now? It can really be boiled down to technology. New technology has increased the sheer number of images that you are exposed to everyday. In the 70’s, we saw about 500 ads a day. Now, we see about 5,000 ads a day.

Children, those ages 8 to 18, are spending an average of eight hours a day hooked up to devices where advertisers can reach them. What do advertisers do? They cut through the clutter with increased emphasis on violence, hyper violence, and hyper sexualized.

--

How is this not empowering? I want to make an appeal first to logic. When we’re talking about sex objects, we’re talking about dichotomies. In Western thinking, we think of black and white, yes/no, two opposing categories. When we’re thinking about sex objects, we’re thinking about the object subject dichotomy. Subjects act, objects are acted upon.

Even if you become the perfect object, the perfect sex object, you are perfectly subordinate because that position will always be acted on; so there’s not power in being a sex object when you think about it logically. Beyond that, this idea that sex sells, I like to challenge that directly because the fact is if sex sold, most women are heterosexual and we are sexual beings, so why wouldn’t we see half naked men everywhere in advertising.

I would like to propose that something else is being sold here. To men, they’re being sold this idea constantly that they are sexual subjects. They are in the driver’s seat. It makes them feel powerful to see images of objectified women everywhere.

--

Also, sexual dysfunction. This idea that sex sells, isn’t it strange that if you think of yourself as a sex object, and we’re raised in a society that raises little girls to view their bodies as projects to work on and be sex objects that it actually gets in the way of good sex?

What tends to happen is that women who are high self-objectifies actually engage in what’s called Spectatoring Drink-Sex Act. Instead of being involved and engaged in the pleasure and what’s happening, you tend to view yourself from a third-party perspective, a spectators perspective where you’re worried about rolls of fat hanging out, what that leg looks like. Again, it gets in the way of sexual pleasure.

If there’s anything I can pitch to you about why you don’t want to live in a culture that sexually objectifies, it diminishes your sexual pleasure.

--

First, Sociological Images, a blog run by Dr. Lisa Wade; worked with students to pull Abercrombie and Fitch’s padded bras or padded swimsuits for toddlers. They ran a campaign where they blogged about it. It got some press coverage. There were some petitions, and they pulled the product nationally from their stores.

--

Self-Objectification (Part 2)

                                       Self-Objectification (Part 2)

     In Part two let’s focus on self-objectification.

     According to Calogero (2013), “self-objectification occurs when the objectifying gaze is turned inward, such that women view themselves through the perspective of an observer and engage in chronic self-surveillance.”  

     Female self-objectification can best be defined as “regular exposure to objectifying experiences that socialize girls and women to engage in self-objectification, whereby they come to internalize this view of themselves as an object or collection of body parts” (Kroon & Perez, 2013, p. 16)

   Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) postulated that self-objectification can increase women’s anxiety about physical appearance (i.e., fear about when and how one’s body will be looked at and evaluated); and increase women’s opportunities for body shame (i.e., the emotion that results from measuring oneself against a cultural standard and coming up short).

--

The media influences (dictates) to society what is sexy or desirable in a man or woman’s body. For example:

Men are expected to have small waists, wash-board abs, muscular arms, hairless chests and a large thick penis.

Women are expected to have small waists, full pert breasts, shapely legs with a thigh gap, a round firm ass, smooth skin, thick luxurious hair, full lips and exotic eyes.

--

In her book Femininity and Domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression

Sandra Bartky (1990) describes a time where she was made a victim of objectification:

“It is a fine spring day, and with an utter lack of self-consciousness, I am bouncing down the street. Suddenly I hear men’s vices. Catcalls and whistles fill the air. These noises are clearly sexual in intent and they are meant for me; they come from across the street. I freeze. As Sartre would say, I have been petrified by the gaze of the Other.

My face flushes and my motions become stiff and self-conscious. The body which only a moment before I inhabited with such ease now floods my consciousness. I have been made into an object. While it is true that for these men I am nothing but, let us say, a “nice piece of ass,” there is more involved in this encounter than this mere fragmented

perception of me. They could, after all, have enjoyed me in silence…I could have passed

by without having been turned to stone. But I must be made to know that I am a “nice piece of ass”: I must be made to see myself as they see me.

--

Sexual objectification means that women are widely seen as sex objects for male sexual pleasure. This objectification occurs in two areas:

(1) interpersonal or social encounters, and

(2) media exposure.

Interpersonal or social encounters include catcalls, checking out/ staring at, or gazing at women’s bodies, sexual comments, and harassment.

Media exposure spotlights women’s bodies and body parts while depicting women as the target of a non-reciprocated male gaze. (Calogero, Tantleff-Dunn, & Thompson, 2011).

--

     Female self-objectification has many consequences, including eating disorders, which are associated with depression. According to National Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders (2013), up to 24 million people of all ages and genders suffer from an eating disorder. This site also reports that 5% of American females believe in a body type ideal, commonly described as “petite” (Eating, 2013).

     While this might not seem like a large enough number to create concern, data show that 47% of girls in the 5th- 12th grade report wanting to lose weight because they compare themselves to idealized magazine photographs, and 69% of girls in the 5th-12th grade report that such images influence their idea of a “perfect” body shape (Eating, 2013). This paper will address the ways that women are objectified, the negative consequences of self-objectification and ways to prevent it.

    

--

    Franzoi (1995) writes that “there are two basic ways of thinking about one’s body that have a particular relevance to a discussion of gender differences in body esteem. One way is to view the body as an object of discrete parts that others aesthetically evaluate, and the other is to conceptualize it as a dynamic process where function is of greater consequence” (Franzoi, 1995, p. 417). The vast majority of people tend to view the female body in terms of its form, rather than function, and “it is this aspect of the physical self that influences people’s first impressions and forms the basis for the physical attractiveness stereotype” 

--

Self-Objectification: Contributing Factors Media Influences.

     With respect to how self-objectification is influenced by media, Aubrey (2006) states that, “the relationship between the body and sex is unambiguously portrayed in contemporary media, and conforming to a thin body ideal is crucial to sexual attractiveness” (p. 366). Tolman and Debold (1994) agree, stating that a thin female body is associated with success and power. All of this communicates to women that their

bodies are important commodities that can influence life experiences (Muehlenkamp & Saris-Baglama, 2002). The thin body ideal refers to the European concept of a slender female with a small physique and little body fat. “Thin-body ideal occurs as a result

of social pressure to attain a lean figure, placed on individuals by the media, family, peers, and interpersonal encounters” (Stice & Shaw, 1994, p. 289).

     The media displays this through messages in popular magazines, films, and television. For example, “in magazines, weight loss messages are often placed next to messages about one’s sex life, implying that weight loss will lead to a better sex life,” while “on television shows, women are judged as romantic or sexual partners based on their appearance” (Aubrey, 2006, p. 366-367).

     In a longitudinal study, Aubrey (2006) examined the long-term relationship between media habits and self-objectification, and whether media exposure increases self-objectification, or whether self-objectification drives the selection of sexually objectifying media. She found that “exposure to sexually objectifying television programs is associated with an increase in viewers’ definition of their physical selves in terms of how the body appears, rather than what it can do” (Aubrey, 2006, p. 381).

This occurs through frequent and repeated exposure to television programs, soap operas, talk shows, music videos, and advertising. From this study, Aubrey (2006) concluded that how long someone is exposed to sexually objectifying messages is less damaging than how frequently such messages are viewed over time.

--

Societal Influences.:

      Franzoi (1995) writes that “starting at a young age, from Barbie dolls and toy makeup cases, girls are encouraged to play with, to the close attention given to clothing fashion and other bodily adornments, females are taught that their body as object is a significant factor in how others will judge their overall value” (p. 418). These messages are conveyed by important socializing agents such as parents, peers, and teachers. Typically, gender role socialization includes heavy emphasis on how girls/women should look, and if this is overemphasized, girls may continually seek reassurance about their appearance to make sure they are socially accepted and not subject to ridicule or rejection.

--

     Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) find that self-objectification can lead not only to depression, but also to body shame and eating disorders. They state that “women’s ongoing efforts to change their body and appearance through diet, exercise, fashion,

beauty products, and perhaps most dangerously, surgery and eating disorders, reveal what may be a perpetual and hardly adaptive body-based shame, which results from a fusion of negative self- evaluation with the potential for social exposure” (p. 181).

     Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) find that body shame arises from “not knowing exactly when and how one’s body will be looked at and evaluated can create anxiety about potential exposure. Data further show that women’s appearance anxiety may have roots in negative early life social experiences, including histories of receiving negative appearance-related comments” (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997, p. 182).

     Lastly, they state that “eating disorders are passive, pathological strategies, reflecting girls’ and women’s lack of power to more directly control the objectification of their

bodies” (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997, p. 192). Two feminist thoughts that support this are that women’s concerns with dieting and weight control reflect their normative discontent toward their bodies, and that women view eating disorders as a political

statement of protest against the patriarchal system (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997, p. 192).

--

     Female self-objectification can also lead to sexual dysfunction, because engaging in sexual activity involves another person focusing attention on one’s body. During sexual relations a woman can be distracted by thoughts about her body rather than experiencing sexual pleasure (Tiggemann, 2011).

     Wiederman (2000) found that during sexual intercourse one third of college women experienced problematic body image self-consciousness.

--

Female self-objectification is something most women experience at some point in life because society sends many such messages in many ways, offering an idealized version of the perfectly shaped woman that is, for most, unattainable or inadvisable to seek. Preventing and treating self-objectification in girls and women will lead to increased societal rewards and social powers (Breines, Crocker and Garcia, 2008). The paper offers explanations for how and why female self-objectification occurs and what can do to counter its negative consequences in our society.

--

This information has been gleaned from sources on the internet and presented here for discussion. Either comment here or on the Facebook post.

Part 1: What is Sexual Objectification of men or women?

                        

                   Part 1: What is Sexual Objectification of men or women?

     Objectification of men or women is the act of treating a person as a commodity or an object without regard to their personality or dignity. Sexual objectification (SO) takes this a step further making them an object for a person’s sexual gratification with no consideration for them as human beings.

     Sexual objectification (SO) of the female or male body equates their worth with their

body’s appearance and sexual functions which is highly subjective. The person’s body or body parts are singled out and separated from them as a person and they are viewed primarily as a physical object of male or female sexual desire and gratification.

    

     Objectification affects both men and women but to simplify I will use Objectification of women as referenced in the following study.

     Fredrickson and Roberts study (1997) asserted that women to varying degrees

internalize this outsider view and begin to self-objectify by treating themselves

as an object to be looked at and evaluated on the basis of appearance.

     Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) postulated that self-objectification

can increase women’s anxiety about physical appearance (i.e., fear about when and how one’s body will be looked at and evaluated); and increase women’s opportunities for body shame (i.e., the emotion that results from measuring oneself against a cultural standard and coming up short).

     This SO often intersects with women’s other sociocultural identities, such

as sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, and social class, to form unique sets of media portrayals and experiences for subgroups of women (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997).

     For example, lesbian and/or same-sex female relationships have become increasing sexualized, exploited, and used in the media to target some male fantasies of being involved sexually with two or more women at the same time.

      In addition, the sexual exploitation and victimization of African American women from the days of slavery to the present has led to media images and stereotypes of Black women as sexual aggressors and sexual savages (Greene, 1994; Thomas, Witherspoon, & Speight, 2004).

     In contrast, Asian American women are often portrayed in the media as sexually

subservient, childlike, and exotic (Root, 1995). Furthermore, women in lower social class positions are often considered gross, overly sexed, untamed, crude, and deserving of sexual exploitation and aggression (Pharr, 1988; Smith, 2008).

    

     For example, the APA’s (2007b) review of studies examining depictions of women in the media including commercials, prime-time television programs, movies, music lyrics and videos, magazines, advertising, sports media, video games, and Internet sites revealed that women more often than men are depicted in sexualizing and objectified manners (e.g., wearing revealing and provocative clothing, portrayed in ways that emphasize their body parts and sexual readiness, serving as decorative objects). In addition, women portrayed in the media are frequently the target of men’s sexists comments (e.g., use of deprecating words to describe women), sexual remarks

(e.g., comments about women’s body parts), and behaviors (e.g., ogling, leering,

Cat-calling and harassment).

     Many women also experience immersed forms of SO that occur when women are part of situations, environments, and subcultures where the SO of women is encouraged and promoted. For example, certain situations that accentuate awareness of observers’ perspectives on women’s bodies, such as ballet dancing, beauty pageants, modeling, and cheerleading, are likely to enhance SO (Slater & Tiggemann, 2002).

      In addition, many women work in environments whose main purpose is to offer explicit targets for men to objectify them and that reward them for treating themselves as sexual objects (e.g., exotic dancing and cocktail waitressing).

     The first criterion for a Sexual Objectification Environment (SOE) is the existence of traditional gender roles.

     Gender roles are the set of behaviors, personality attributes, self-concepts, and

expectations organized according to cultural definitions and prescriptions of masculinity and femininity (Gutek, 1985; Worell & Remer, 2003). Defined in a traditional manner, men’s gender roles are oriented towards competency, achievement, and agency and include traits such as independence, aggression, competitiveness, rationality, problem solving, and objectivity (Bakan, 1966; Parsons & Bales, 1955).

      In addition, traditional gender role socialization encourages many men to be powerful, controlling, and dominant; see women as sex objects; view sex as a conquest; and believe that women are their property (Worell & Remer, 2003). Alternately, women’s traditional gender roles tend to be relationally and expressively oriented and include characteristics such as nurturance, emotionality, passivity, dependence, and

harmony (Bem, 1993).

     Also, traditional gender role socialization encourages many women to be submissive to men and fulfill their needs and wants, seek men’s protection, and accept responsibility for limiting and controlling men’s sexual behavior (Worell & Remer, 2003). Thus, the existence of traditional gender roles in an environment is likely to contribute to attitudes and behaviors that allow for and normalize the SO of women.

     The final core criterion for an environment to be sexually objectifying is the acknowledgement and approval of male gaze in that setting. As Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) asserted, “The most subtle and deniable way sexualized evaluation is enacted—and arguably the most ubiquitous—is through gaze, or visual inspection of the body” (p. 175). Quinn (2002) reframed sexual gaze as “girl watching,” a specific, yet subtle, form of sexual harassment that cannot be avoided and is not under women’s control.

     According to Quinn, girl watching is a “targeted tactic of power” where men use gaze to demonstrate their right to physically and sexually evaluate women. The activity serves as a form of playing a game among some men; however, the targeted woman is generally understood to be an object, rather than a player, in the game. Thus, from a male point of view, “acts such as girl watching are simply games played with objects: women’s bodies” (Quinn, 2002, p. 398). The effects of male gaze on women may be intensified by the accompaniment of sexually evaluative commentary (Allen, 1984).

     Two other manifestations of objectifying gaze that may be present in an SOE are the inclusion of visual media showing interpersonal encounters (i.e., men looking at women in advertisements) and visual media depicting women’s bodies and body parts Fredrickson  & Roberts, 1997).

--

In subsequent parts this will be further discussed and any points made in the comments here will be addressed.

 --

As the years slip away…

By: Joe P Attanasio

Time is ever moving at a near constant rate. I state it that way because of the proof offered by Stephen Hawkins that gravity does in fact effect time.

How we perceive time to be moving is relative to thousands of factors. When people get in the latter part of their lives time seems to pass faster and faster. The seasons and even years sometime seem to go by in the blink of an eye. As a young boy I remember long summer days that seem to last forever. Also true is the idea that when you are having fun, time flies, but when you are being punished or are sick, it can drag on ever so slowly.

I have another birthday tomorrow and it made me think about time, hence the topic for today. I have an interesting life (in my opinion) and enjoy myself most of the time. Perhaps that is why time seems to be moving so fast for me. I am not getting older by any standards except chronologically (alright physically too!). I embrace life and the constant change that inevitably accompanies it. I look forward to crossing new horizons and challenging myself in ways I cannot yet perceive.

I have lived long enough to have personally witnessed many changes throughout out the years. Technological innovation of course was huge in the last 66 years. I have also witnessed cultural change growing from many roots, some good and some bad. I am aware of a trend in self-satisfaction and attention deficits. I am also aware of a loss in patriotism in general among the younger generations. I see morality being redefined, some good and some bad.

I always was a passionate person in general. I despise apathy as anyone who know me has heard me say time and time again. I find I am becoming even more opinionated as I get older. Perhaps I feel I have earned the right to speak my mind a little bit more. I truly believe wisdom comes with age, perhaps not intelligence, but wisdom for sure.

I find organized religion to be something I feel I do not need or want. I have a deep respect for people’s beliefs however, no matter what they are. I believe there is more to life than conception, birth, death and nothingness. I will leave that right there without getting philosophical.

I have a wish for the world that all people learn to love each other at least in some basic way. I will settle for acceptance if love seems too intimate a word. In the sixties we used words like, “It’s your bag” and “do your own thing” to signify that we accept each other being different. I am not just talking white, black and yellow here but gay, transsexual, Arabian, Russian and South African etc.

With respect and acceptance of others, human nature can rid itself of the ideals impressed on us through the media and replace those ideals with what we ourselves feel in our hearts is right.

I will leave this article with a couple of poems from my collection: Thanks for reading along as I ramble.

NOTE: On the left is my face on Conan's body taken on my 25th wedding anniversary. On the right is me a few years ago taken for a funny story about the scarf that I will share someday here.

One of my first poems takes a look at what a day is and what it can mean.

What is a day?

By: Joe P. Attanasio

.

.

.

Some think a day is just a measure of time.

Some think a poem is just a measure of rhyme.

But each day is a life, complete with birth and death.

Not sharing with others, but standing alone from the rest.

.

As dawn is born we have a new beginning, a chance.

For goals of all sorts; and for romance

Some days seem long and some very short.

Some are hard, some are restful, all sorts.

.

Sometimes in the morn, we are already dreary.

As a day draws to an end, we may hold it dearly.

But one thing is for sure, each day will hold.

So much more for those who are bold

.

The days in the past are written in stone.

The ones not yet here stand empty and alone.

Remember as each day begins to unfold.

We have a say, how the story is told.

.

If you’ve planned a day from dawn to night

You know, they never come out quite right.

You can enjoy a day fully without any plans.

Just let it happen and see how it lands.

**

             Perception

         BY: Joe P. Attanasio

 .           

Sensory input, rationalized mentally

Conjured and intuitive assessment

Conceptual, biased reality, imagined

Mental recreation of fact; perception

                    *

We see what we want to see,

And hear what we want to hear.

“I can’t believe he was a killer,”

“He seemed like such a nice guy”

                     *

“She is such a slut”

“He is a selfish bastard”

“She is a bitch”

“He is a womanizer and a cad”

                    *

Labels, based on perception

Judged reality by our assessment

Shared with others for validation

Of our own ambiguous imagery

                     *

Our own perception of ourselves

Not based on reality, but conjured

Camouflaged by desire and confidence

Blended with self-esteem and fantasy

                           *

Our lives are controlled by perception

Input from our senses processed

With semi-conscious assessment

Always question your perception!

**

Please check out other blogs from my archives.

Fake names on Face-Book and Amazon

By: Joe P. Attanasio

I considered writing under a pen name and publishing some erotic-romance stories. These tend to be short and easy to write and sell quite well in the marketplace. I have a number of stories already written that could easily be converted. I would not want to use my given name, as it is associated with an entirely different genre, and these stories could affect my reputation.

I decided to scrap the idea as the perils far outweigh the benefits. However, I found the topic of using a pseudonym or pen name in both Facebook and Amazon an interesting subject open for debate on many levels.

I want to make clear that while I consider using a pseudonym or pen name for the above reasons I frown on the idea of using one for the purpose of cross promoting your work or for "trolling" and “defaming” people which is very rude.

With Amazon you have to use your real information Name, Address, Bank Account, Social Security Number etc. for legal and tax reporting reason because of the royalties for selling books. Amazon will allow you to use up to three pen names on the books you publish. Although law enforcement is privy to that information, no one else needs to know that the pen name is also you.

Facebook however, has its own policy as stated below.

***

Here is Facebook’s policy regarding the use of names:

Facebook is a community where people use their authentic identities. We require people to provide the name they use in real life; that way, you always know who you're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe.

You may be having trouble changing your name if:

Your name doesn't follow our name policy

You changed your name in the last 60 days

You were previously asked to verify your name on Facebook

You can also add an alternate name (ex: maiden name, nickname) to your profile. If your first and last name isn’t listed on your account and you’re unable to change it, let us know.

What names are allowed on Facebook?

Facebook is a community where people use their authentic identities. We require people to provide the name they use in real life; that way, you always know who you're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe.

Please refrain from adding any of these to your name:

Symbols, numbers, unusual capitalization, repeating characters or punctuation.

Characters from multiple languages.

Titles of any kind (ex: professional, religious).

Words, phrases or nicknames in place of a middle name.

Offensive or suggestive words of any kind.

Other things to keep in mind:

The name you use should be your authentic identity; as your friends call you in real life and as our acceptable identification forms would show.

Nicknames can be used as a first or middle name if they're a variation of your authentic name (like Bob instead of Robert).

You can also list another name on your account (ex: maiden name, nickname, professional name) by adding an alternate name to your profile.

Profiles are for individual use only. We offer Pages for professional personas, organizations and businesses.

Pretending to be anything or anyone isn't allowed.

If your authentic name isn’t listed on your account, please change your name. If you're unable to change it, learn more.

What types of ID does Facebook accept?

You can confirm your identity in 1 of 3 ways. When submitting documentation, please cover up any personal information we don't need to verify your identity (ex: credit card number, Social Security number). We encrypt people’s connections to Facebook by default, including IDs you send to us. We delete your ID information after verification is complete.

Option 1

We will accept any government-issued ID that contains your name and date of birth. Examples include:

Birth certificate

Driver’s license

Passport

Marriage certificate

Official name change paperwork

Personal or vehicle insurance card

Non-driver's government ID (ex: disability, SNAP card, national ID card)

Green card, residence permit or immigration papers

Voter ID card

Option 2

You can provide two different forms of ID from the following list (ex: a bank statement and a library card, but not two bank statements). The names on your IDs must match each other, and one of the IDs must include a photo or date of birth that matches the information on your profile.

Below are some examples of IDs we'll accept:

Bank statement

Bus card

Check

Credit card

Employment verification

Library card

Mail

Magazine subscription stub

Medical record

Membership ID (ex: pension card, union membership, work ID, professional ID)

Paycheck stub

Permit

School card

School record

Social Security card

Utility bill

Yearbook photo (actual scan or photograph of the page in your yearbook)

Option 3

If you don’t have an ID that shows your authentic name as well as your photo or date of birth, you can provide two forms of ID from Option 2 above, and then provide a government ID that includes a date of birth or photo that matches the information on your profile. We won't add the name or other information from the government ID to your account.

--

Why Facebook wants your name

Facebook estimates that nearly 83 million registered users are actually duplicated accounts, spammers, or non-people, like that profile you made for your puppy. That's a staggering number, and Facebook has acknowledged such "inauthentic" accounts as a potential threat to its brand and business. Facebook has also made its effort to crack down on nicknames and pseudonyms pretty public, allowing users to display "alternate" names only in parentheses.

There is no estimate for people who go by a realistic fake name, although the phenomenon could potentially pose trouble for the social network that wants to own your real identity on the web.

**

Facebook depends on its users to be honest. With 239,000 users for every Facebook employee, it's logistically impossible to verify all the information that is submitted. Fake names, fake ages, fake interests — all these inaccuracies interfere with the company's ability to accurately target advertisements. Facebook wants to build the world's most comprehensive database of people. If the information is current and correct, Facebook could eventually become a place where people bank or vote or even file taxes. If it's filled with errors, it nears uselessness — at least, as far as advertisers are concerned.

Real names are key to keeping the integrity of that database. By forcing people to use their real names, Facebook pressures users to mirror their offline identities. That’s why Facebook, now a public company, has made enforcing its real-names policy a top priority. Employees and automated systems trawl the site for fakers, sometimes sweeping up genuine users including Pulitzer Prize-winning author Salman Rushdie by accident.

 FACEBOOK, NOW A PUBLIC COMPANY, HAS MADE ENFORCING ITS REAL-NAMES POLICY A TOP PRIORITY

"Facebook is a community where people use their real identities. When everyone uses their real first and last names, people can know who they're connecting with. This helps keep our community safe," a Facebook spokesperson said in an email. "It’s a violation of our policies to use a fake name or operate under a false identity, and we encourage people to report anyone they think is doing this."

Facebook has a dedicated investigations team that reviews user-reported aliases, and the company has also built and is constantly working on "complex technical systems that flag potential fake accounts for review," the Facebook spokesperson said. As a last resort, Facebook asks users to submit a form of government-issued identification.

*

*

*

So obviously, making a Facebook page under your pen name is risky and could get both of your accounts banned.

        ***

Fake names on Amazon contributed to this article below that was in the Huffington Post.

Below this dead link is the article from the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/rj-ellory-fake-amazon-reviews-caught_n_1854713.html

Article here:

Bestselling, award-winning crime author R.J. Ellory has been caught faking Amazon reviews for both his own books and the books of his competitors.

Ellory was caught writing the fake Amazon reviews by fellow author Jeremy Duns, according to ABC News. Such an act is dubbed "sock-puppeting," or writing anonymous online reviews praising one's own work.

Gawker posted the complete Twitter thread written by Duns, via Storify, in which the author describes the posts Ellory wrote about his own works.

"Ellory writes 5-star reviews of his own work on Amazon. Long, purple tributes to his own magnificent genius," Duns tweeted. "RJ Ellory also writes shoddy, sh----y sniping reviews of others authors' work on Amazon, under an assumed identity."

Adding, "Prasing [sic] yourself is pathetic. Attacking other writers like this? I have no time for it, and have no time for anyone who defends it."

Ellory posted one of the fake Amazon reviews under the pseudonym "Nicodemus Jones," writing: "I don't need to really say anything about the plot of this book. All I will say is that there are paragraphs and chapters that just stopped me dead in my tracks. Some of it was chilling, some of it raced along, some of it was poetic and langorous and had to be read twice and three times to really appreciate the depth of the prose...it really is a magnificent book. Ignore all dissentors and naysayers, this book is not trying to be anything other than a great story, brilliantly told. Just buy it, read it, and make up your own mind. Whatever else it might do, it will touch your soul."

"Nicodemus Jones" also wrote a negative review about Stuart MacBride's "Dark Blood." It was in this review that Duns caught onto Ellory's fraudulent reviews. He noticed that one particular Nicodemus Jones thread had postings by user "RJ Ellory," according to the Guardian.

Ellory issued a statement to the Guardian, offering his apologies for sock-puppeting.

"The recent reviews – both positive and negative – that have been posted on my Amazon accounts are my responsibility and my responsibility alone. I wholeheartedly regret the lapse of judgment that allowed personal opinions to be disseminated in this way and I would like to [apologize] to my readers and the writing community."

Ellory, who won the Theakstons Old Peculier Crime Novel of the Year award in 2010 for "A Simple Act of Violence," is not the only author guilty of writing fake reviews.

Orlando Figes, a leading historian, admitted to writing anonymous Amazon reviews celebrating his own work and condemning the work of his competitors in 2010, according the BBC. He was sued by two historians and ordered to pay damages.

One of the United Kingdom's most successful thriller writers, Stephen Leather, also admitted to sock-puppeting and claimed the practice is commonplace.

“I’ll go on to several forums … and post there, under my own name and under various other names and various other characters," Leather disclosed at the Harrogate Crime Writing Festival, according to the Telelgraph. "You build this whole network of characters who talk about your books and sometimes have conversations with yourself … I have friends who are sockpuppets … One person on their own, difficult to create a buzz. If you’ve got ten friends, and they’ve got friends, and you can get them all as one creating a buzz, then hopefully you’ll be all right."

John Locke, a successful self-publisher and author of "How I Sold One Million E-Books In Five Months," admitted to buying five-star reviews to boost his Amazon visibility, The New York Times reports.

Sam Millar was accused of the act earlier this year. Science fiction and fantasy authors also found that frustrated writer Robert Stanek was sock-puppeting in 2009.

The Telegraph's Jake Kerridge questioned if the Ellory scandal is just the tip of the iceberg.

"Already other publishing practices are coming under scrutiny. Do too many crime writers provide quotes for the jackets of their friends’ books?" he asked, adding, "Most of the crime writers I know are genial, friendly souls (Ellory has long been regarded by many in the community as atypically self-aggrandising and chippy), so perhaps not. But since Amazon is unlikely to discontinue its practice of allowing pseudonymous reviews, the industry needs to get to work on regaining readers’ trust."

Authors have already publicly condemned Ellory for abusing online anonymity by "misusing these channels in ways that are fraudulent and damaging to publishing at large." Notable authors who have signed the petition against sock-puppeting include Karin Slaughter, Ian Rankin, Jo Nesbo and Val McDermid.

             ***

I hope you found this interesting and feel free to visit my other blogs as listed in my archives.

Politics and Religion on Facebook

Musings by: Joe P. Attanasio

Let me preface this blog with some insights about me personally. If you haven’t read my past blogs let me recommend two:

That is not what I meant! By: Joe P. Attanasio

And,

Passion and Debate: Thoughts by: Joe P. Attanasio.

In the first blog I endeavor to bring to everyone attention how in written communication our intended meaning is often lost or misinterpreted.

When commenting and posting on Political and Religious subject matter (both sensitive issues for many) this has the potential for damaging relationships.

In the second blog I give my opinion that ‘Passion and Debate mix as well as Oil and Water.’ I go on to say:

“I think a debate should have rules. Perhaps be limited to a certain amount of time or number of points. This should be agreed on beforehand. I also think a person should be able to “agree to disagree” in some cases and end all discussion by making that statement.

I know some people that enjoy debating just about anything with their friends. They revel in presenting pros and cons for hours. They get to exhibit there knowledge and expertise and truly enjoy the whole experience. I say, “Good for you if that is your thing.”

To me, debate is just a fancy word for argue until you prove yourself right. Although I am passionate about a great many things, you will rarely find me willing to debate my point. I don’t like the confrontation. I will state my opinion and you can agree or disagree. Try to debate with me and “I will pass”.

   

So basically I do not like to discuss Religion or Politics in public on Facebook because it makes me uncomfortable and because I fear my comments may be misinterpreted. I also do not like to even see most of these.

I have felt myself bristle with anger over a number of political and religious posts in the last few years. The comments people make range from supportive to rude to completely idiotic in my opinion. While this may be mildly amusing to some, I take umbrage over these posts.

I feel many of the political memes I see have been created to discredit one political party or individual or another. I suspect that is the sole purpose for many of the memes to be created, so we can spread and sway our friends in one direction or the other. Well, I personally think that is terrible and I refuse to become part of it.

While the religious memes are generally benign in nature bringing religious views into unrelated posts as comments can cause hard feelings between people of different mindsets.

Especially around election time I wish Facebook would allow filtering by use of a button to hide all political posts. When the status or meme is posted a list of categories could come up like Religious, Political, Advertisement, Adult Language, or Other to be selected. Of course, this will never happen as Facebook wants as many posts and interactions as they can get to show to their advertisers. 

These types of posts are all too frequent for my taste.

This is just me giving my opinion.

Read through my archives for all my blog titles.

That is not what I meant!

By: Joe P. Attanasio

This blog is about what people perceive you to have said.

When two people are talking face to face we communicate with words, actions, and expressions or body language.

Often our smile or grin tells the other person that we are being playful or kidding when we say something. Our eyes convey concern or the way we stand can show resolve. There are many ways we use our bodies to help communicate. We also read other people by observing their bodies. Often what they say is secondary to their body language for conveying their intentions.

The trouble is that in today’s world most of our communication is typed and sent in messages. There is no way to ensure that your words will be received in the same meaning that you intended when you wrote them.

As writers we may be more equipped to convey our meaning than a lot of other people but that is of little comfort when you are misinterpreted. The old adage “Assume means make an ass of you and me”, especially plays into written communication.

Many words have multiple meanings and assuming the writer means one thing when they meant another can throw a slant on a whole conversation. I have seen numerous Facebook posts with comments where one friend or acquaintance chastises someone for making a comment to another person based on what they assume the conversation meant.

Once seen (read) the words you posted cannot be unseen. We have a responsibility to choose our words carefully and scrutinize them for misinterpretation before posting. I think a little awareness in this area will go a long way toward ensuring people know what we meant to say.

Facebook contributes to the problem with their limited choice of buttons. Most people click LIKE to show they read a post. Clicking “like” does not always mean a person agrees with a post.

Another factor that I see come into play on Facebook is that many public posts should be private. By posting publicly people invite opinions and comments that can cause conflict and hard feelings. If you are going to say something publicly, be ready to own it and defend it is my advice.

Another point I want to address here is that behind the veil of relative anonymity or knowing you will never have to meet the people you are talking to in real life, many get a false sense of bravado.  In other words, people feel comfortable being rude and outspoken because they are detached personally. In my opinion, this is a poor excuse for acting any differently than you would in person.

Depending on their mood, people can interpret what you said to be totally different than what you meant. Misunderstandings have ruined many friendships and families.  

Let’s all make a conscience effort to think before we type.

**

Please feel free to check out my Blog archives for other posts.

First chapter of "A Butchers Tale"

By: Joe P. Attanasio

This was my first attempt at writing a novel. I was 62 years old and had just retired from my profession as a meat-cutter and manager.

My writing skills have improved but I have never revised this story. I present it here as written in 2011. 

This is a historical adventure. This is the story of a passionate and idealistic young man named Joseph in fourteenth century England. He gives up his career as a butcher with his trade guild in York and follows a young woman, Dorothy, and her family into the border country to the north. Dorothy and her family are going to take over the farm they inherited when her uncle died.

   The English-Scottish war is heating up and the border region is very unstable. This is the time of Edward I, (Longshanks), and William Wallace. Every effort has been made to ensure the historical events and flavor of the times is accurately portrayed.

   For those that are familiar with the reference; this story resembles a fourteenth century version of “Little House on the Prairie” written by Laura Ingalls Wilder.

**

Chapter 1

     My name is Joseph and I was born in Brighthelmstone on the southern coast of England in the year 1281. I am a journeyman butcher and was taught the trade by my father. I don’t remember my mother; she died when I was only four years old. My father died two years ago in the year 1298 and I moved to York. I am tall and strong and no stranger to hard work. I have brown wavy hair and blue eyes. I got a job working in a butcher shop and joined the butcher’s guild.

    

    It was May in the year 1300. The butcher’s guild was participating in the annual Mystery Plays again this year. I am working on making props and helping to decorate the pageant cart. The cart will be moved throughout York so many people can see the performance. We are doing the biblical scene of Adam and Eve this year. Another butcher from our shop, and a friend of mine named Thomas, is playing Adam.

     I was painting signs one day when Thomas walked up talking with the most beautiful girl I have ever seen. “Joseph, I want you to meet Dorothy she will be playing Eve.” I stood up and smiled and bowed, “Pleasure to meet you Dorothy.” She smiled and bowed her head slightly, “A pleasure to meet you too, Joseph.” Her golden hair hung gently on her shoulders. She had light blue-green eyes that sparkled with youth and vibrancy. Her skin was smooth and ivory colored. Her lips were plump and inviting. They said goodbye and they both walked away talking.

     I watched Dorothy as she walked. She had a very nice shape and her hips swayed with grace and charm as she disappeared around the corner with Thomas. I would sure like to be in the Garden of Eden with her I thought, as I went back to painting.

     I saw Thomas and Dorothy here and there as we prepared for opening day and every time I could not help but admire Dorothy’s beauty and grace. It felt like a sweet fresh wind blew past me whenever she was around, arousing my senses.

     

     It was one week before the pageant when Thomas had a terrible accident. He was preparing a large sow for slaughter, when the sow slipped and crashed against him; it pushed him through the fence and a broken board pierced his chest. I went to see him at St. Leonards Hospital and he was pale and weak. He was in very serious condition and not expected to live. I knew the priest had already heard his confession as one could not be admitted for care until that was done.

     “Joseph, I want to tell you two things. Dorothy is sweet on you and she asked me not to tell you. She said her heart skips a beat whenever she is near you.” Thomas coughed a few times then cleared his throat.

     “John the director was in to see me already. I told him he should consider you to take my place in the Mystery Play. I told him you could play my part and that you and Dorothy had feelings for each other and that would enhance the performance. He is not convinced as he has never seen you act but I know you can. He is willing to see you try it.

     Go to my house and take the script and look it over. It is not hard to learn. There is not that much dialog and if you practice it before you see him you will convince him you can act the part.” I assured Thomas I would do my best and that helped him relax a bit.

     I went and got the script and sat there practicing the words and pretending I was talking to Dorothy. It was not difficult to remember the words and I learned them all easily. There were only five parts, the Narrator, God, Adam, Eve and the Serpent. I had to learn the cues from the Narrator, God and Eve. The Serpent never talked to me only to Eve. All I had to do was deliver my lines with the right feeling.

     Dorothy entered Thomas’s house as I was preparing to leave. “Thomas told me I might find you here,” she said with a sad look on her face. “I hope Thomas does not die, he looks pretty bad” she added.

     “He is young and strong and he is in a good hospital getting good care. All we can do is pray to God he will recover.” We talked for a while and she agreed to run through the lines with me. She read all the lines but mine to help me learn my cues. She made her voice deep when she was the Narrator and I had to smile the first few times. I forced myself to concentrate on the lines instead of us being alone there. After some practice she agreed to see the director with me, so off we went.

     

     John consented to hear us act our parts together.  We really played well off each other and John saw the love we had for each other and liked what he saw. John told me I had the part. We had the wardrobe altered as Thomas was shorter than me. We covered ourselves with loincloths decorated with greenery but after we sinned we were embarrassed by our nakedness and had to wear more clothes.  Dorothy and I rehearsed our lines together even though we knew them so well already. We just liked being together and we were growing very fond of each other. We also worked on decorations and props.

    

     We kept quite busy that week and finally it was time for the pageant to start.  We had 6 shows each day. It was a very hectic schedule but we learned to hurry between shows and it was so much fun. People always crowded around to see the shows. Our show was one of the most popular. People would follow our cart for miles just to watch our show.

     Dorothy would pick the forbidden apple and offer it to me. Dorothy would tempt me to sin every show and I would try to resist every show. I always gave in to her temptation on stage. I was tempted by Dorothy off the stage also and would eagerly do whatever I needed to be with her. We resisted temptation and we kept our relationship professional.

     After eight days and 48 shows we finished the plays for this year. After the final show the troupe had a huge celebration. John the director announced that Thomas was getting better but it would take him a long time before he could return to work. Everyone was pleased with the success of our show and the mood was quite happy.

     

     Dorothy pulled me away from the others and asked, “What are your plans for the future now that the show is over?”

“I really don’t have any plans but I hope to be able to spend some time with you!” I said staring into her beautiful eyes. “I have grown quite fond of you as I am certain you know.”

     “I am quite fond of you also Joseph.” She smiled so sweetly at me. “I wish we could be together but I am going to be leaving York. My Uncle William died a short time ago; he owned a small farm near Jarrow along the Tyne River. My father has agreed to take it over. It is far to the northeast and I am going there to help my mother and my father run the farm. I told my father we really liked each other a lot and I want to be with you. He said you were welcome to join us if you wanted. I understand that you have a good job here and would probably want to stay.”

     I did not need any time to think about it. I wanted a change and I wanted to be near Dorothy. “I will call on your father tomorrow and offer to help your family move. I am willing to go work on the farm for a while and see if I like it. At least I will be near you. I can always come back to York and butcher again if it does not work out.” Dorothy put her arms around my neck and gave me a hug and a kiss on my cheek and said, “Joseph I am falling in love with you and want to be near you always. I am so happy you are coming along to Jarrow!” I smiled and kissed her on her lips. “I fell in love with you the moment I saw you.” I confessed.

     

     Dorothy’s father’s name is Luther. He works at the lumber mill just outside the north-east gate. I found him at the mill that morning. He is a short and stocky man about 40 years old. He has long white hair and a soft voice. He was very fit for his age and strong from all the hard work. I had met him a few times in the past and we got along good together. He saw our play five times.

     “Dorothy told me you were going to come along and help with the farm. I can promise you food and a dry place to sleep but I do not know about paying you until we get settled there.”

     I told him, “I am fine with that. I have saved some coin and am not worried about being paid for now. I love your daughter and just want to be near her. I will work hard for you but I must confess I do not know much about farming. What can I do to help you get ready to go?”

     He told me, “Talk to my wife Catherine and she will give you a list of things you can do to help.” He added, “I am no stranger to farm work but there is a lot I do not know either, we can learn together.”

     Catherine and Dorothy were sitting together talking when I arrived at their house. It was easy to see where Dorothy got her good looks. Catherine has short white hair and is rather petite in size, her cheeks are rosy and her beautiful blue eyes sparkle like sapphires. She is a bundle of energy and high spirited.

     Dorothy stood up and said, “Joseph, I want you to meet my mother Catherine.”

     “It is nice to meet you Catherine. I saw you watching our play with Luther. I hope you enjoyed it.”

     “I enjoyed it very much.” She added, “I wish my son Sean could have seen it too. He would have been so proud of Dorothy. He is an archer fighting for England in the north of France.”

     “Is Sean younger or older?” I asked

     Dorothy answered, “Sean is my big brother. He is two years older than me. He has been a soldier for 5 years.”

     

     The next two weeks passed quickly and it was time to leave York. I pulled a small cart with our belongings along the well-travelled road out the north gate of York. I wondered how long I would be gone from the great walled city. It took us three days to reach the busy port of Sunderland at the mouth of the Wear River on the North Sea. We found an inn each night and did not have to search for a room among the many farms on the way. The next morning when we started out we knew we would sleep on the farm that night. We bought some bread and mead and other food to take to the farm.

     The coast fell behind as we climbed the hilly terrain between the Wear and the Tyne rivers. Dorothy had not been to the farm for six years and was excited to be going there. Her Uncle William had died two months ago and was the last of his family. He was buried on the farm by a young man from a nearby farm that helped him with the chores. Dorothy and her parents were very excited as we neared the farm. We crested a hill on the worn wagon trail and Catherine pointed toward the river, “There it is! There it is, over there by the river.” I could see three structures clustered together near the river. One large one that I assumed was the barn.

      

     When we arrived at the farm Luther and I took a look around while the ladies stayed in the house tidying it up. The house was bigger than most we saw on the way here. It had a hearth and an oven in the main room and two smaller rooms for sleeping. There was fresh straw on the beds. Behind the house was a tall wild field going down to the river. It was mixed with brambles, small trees and even some big trees. There was a hen house with about 25 chickens. The barn was large and there were two oxen inside. Each ox had a stall for itself. There were sacks of grain in the barn and straw. In the corner was a bin filled with hay.

     On one side of the barn an herb garden was growing. A large open area led up a slight hill to a hardwood forest and had been planted with barley. A wheat field was growing behind the barn and led all the way to a wagon road along the river. It was July and the wheat was getting tall. There was no one around but us. Luther and I were inspecting the grounds. There was no well on the farm. Apparently all water was drawn from the Tyne River. There was four buckets of water on the north side of the house and Luther told me to always keep those full in case the thatched roof caught fire.

     Luther was somewhat familiar with farm life and was explaining how some things would have to be done. He explained that the chickens were free range and allowed to roam the farm to feed with supervision then closed back up in the hen house to keep them safe. There was a leather yoke for each oxen and a work cart for hauling. The manure from the oxen stalls would be spread in the fields to enrich the soil for the crops. He told me the farm could be run by one person most of the time but you needed help for plowing and harvesting.

     

     We heard a man yelling and we could see a young man walking toward us from the river. “Hello!” he yelled as he waved his right arm from side to side. I waved back in recognition and he stopped yelling and approached us. “I am George. I live a few miles up the river and had been helping William on the farm here ever since his son died. I was told a message had been sent to his brother and was expecting you.

     Luther said, “William was my brother. I am Luther. This is a friend of ours, Joseph. He is going to help us run the farm.”

     “Let me show you around,” George said. George was about my age and almost as tall. He had short brown hair and brown eyes. His shoulders were very broad and his neck was thick. He looked very strong. He had a friendly face and a warm smile.

     Dorothy and Catherine came out of the house and George took one look at Dorothy and kept staring at her with a huge smile stuck on his face, he tried to speak but no words came out. I could tell that he was captivated by her beauty. Catherine broke the silence by saying, “Hello I am Catherine and this is my daughter Dorothy, it is nice to meet you.”

     George looked at Catherine and said, “My name is George, I live a few miles up the river and I was helping William.” 

     Catherine invited us all into the house to eat bread and drink mead.

     We sat and talked with George for a long time. He had three brothers and two sisters and lived on a farm up river with his father. His mother passed away four years ago.  He was friends with William’s son Arthur and when Arthur died a little over a year ago he started helping William with the farm. He told Luther that he would introduce him to all the people he needed to know in Jarrow to manage the farm. I could see George was taken with Dorothy’s beauty. She looked especially radiant today. Being out in the countryside seemed to agree with her, perhaps because it made her happy.

     Luther and I followed George around the farm and watched him do the daily chores as he talked and talked about the farm and Jarrow and William. We promised to come up and meet his family someday soon after we got settled. George said, “I will be back in the morning and we can all go to Jarrow, it is not a long walk.” Then he went home for the night.

Please take the time to look over the other blogs from my archives.