Winners and Losers

It may be my imagination or maybe it is just that I am turning into a crotchety old man who only looks to the past because things seem to have been easier back then, but it feels as if our world is turning more and more into a place where there can only be winners and losers. That is - every discussion or issue has a right side and a wrong side; that if someone wins an argument, it means that someone else has lost it; that there is no way of resolving a discussion by coming to a mutual agreement; that it is not possible anymore for both sides to feel as if they have gained what they needed to.

There is no doubt that the leader of the nation to the south of Canada has done much to perpetuate this ideology that there can only be one winner ( and therefore everyone else must be a loser). His most recent comments about the NAFTA discussions stated very clearly that if he did not get everything he wanted, the deal would not happen; that the USA would win what it wanted and he did not care if Canada lost. It may be that Trump's limited vocabulary or any awareness of some of the nuances within the English language exacerbated his stance. It maybe that he is unable to express something in any language other than in black or white terms. Regardless, while he may be the most public figure perpetuated this dogma of winners and losers, he is not alone.

Fundamentalist groups at either end of the political spectrum have always articulated the belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Such groups have never accepted that there is room for any compromise. For most of us, most of the time - we knew such extreme groups were on the fringe and ignored them as often as possible. However, what appears to have changed in the public's psyche is that such extremes are not seen as extreme. Even mainstream, well-speaking, political and community leaders talk publically about winners and losers. Most recently similar language (of absolute winners and losers) was used by the opposing sides of the Kinder Morgan pipe line debate after the latest findings of the Federal Court. In fact, part of the not-so-gradual transition to a win/lose society may be a result of the increased tendency to arbitrate our disagreements in court.

By definition, courts are an adversarial process. Civil courts were created to find a winner and a loser when there was no other way to decide who was right. But civil courts were never meant to be the first line of defence but rather they were meant to be used when every other option had been explored. It feels as if our society has shifted to " I will sue you" as our method of choice of getting someone's attention (see blog of June 27/18 - Lawsuits and the Unfairness of Insurance). By embracing this singular strategy of getting what we want from someone, we have allowed our thinking, our language and our society to ignore the possibility that in some discussions/debates, it is possible that both sides may neither be total winners or losers. We have allowed debates to be polarized so that there can only be two sides. We have created an environment where the only option appears to be aggressive; where we are not only allowed to be, but expected to attack the other side.

Perhaps I am a crotchety old man who looks too fondly at the world I grew up where it was acknowledged, at least by some of us, that there were very few things that could be looked at through black or white lenses; that many of the issues had a multitude of sides and therefore that the solutions were complicated and multi-faceted. But I can't help but think that such a view allowed us to be just a little bit more civilized to those we disagreed with.

Strange Comments and Questions at The Market

I spend about four and a half hours each week spinning at the market. I spin in part because it is a way of attracting notice when perhaps normally people would not notice me; I also spin because I would be incredibly bored if I had to stand/sit there for four and a half hours and do nothing. If I am not going to make a lot of money being there - I might as well get some work done.

For the most part, I enjoy interacting with the public. Spinning allows me to do so in a non-commercial, hopefully non threatening way. Some people are kind and interested in what I do, many are very flattering in their comments - they seldom buy anything but it is nice that they say nice things about my work. Praise does not buy my food, but it does make me feel good and that is just as important. But I do hear some strange comments or I am asked the same questions over and over again.

Frequently a parent walks by, notices what I do and forces their young child to look at me - usually saying something like "your grandmother use to do that" or "isn't that cool" or " that is how you make wool". The child, of course could not care less and has a vacant stare on his/her face desperately trying to find something more interesting to look at (there is an opposite of this scenario when the young child really wants to stay and watch but his/her parent drags them away). I am never too sure if the parent wants my input to their mini lecture - I frequently have an overwhelming urge to yell out " I am making yarn...... the sheep make the wool" but I don't. It seldom seems worthwhile to correct a parent in front of the child.

On a few occasions I have been told that it would be faster to use a machine or that spinning is a dying/dead art and that no one does it anymore. My favourite, at least in terms of leaving me speechless was "spinning is for women".

People do have lots of questions such as "are you a farmer?", "do you spin dog hair?", "why don't you use natural dyes?", "what animal do you get your sheep fur from?" and "does you foot ever get sore?'. I answer each of these question with as much detail as I think the person can bear and always as if it is the first time I have heard the question. However, the question that I get asked on the most consistent basis and that irritates me the most is a variant of " do you ever get your beard caught up in your spinning?". I have been asked this question at least two times at every west coast market I have attended (I do not remember being asked this question nearly as often at the Peterborough Market in Ontario). The question would be almost understandable when I am spinning grey wool - but it happens regardless of the colour I am spinning (including yellow and red); it is almost always asked with a smile or a laugh. I think the people are making a joke. I think they think they are the first person to ever ask that question.

It would be tempting to just assume that the people who ask this question are just ignorant yokels from somewhere in the back country or even more likely that they are American, but alas this is not true. I have had the question asked by well dressed polite people from various parts of the world including England, Australia, Germany, the USA, Columbia and just a week ago I was asked this question by a young lady from Japan wearing a kimono. In spite of speaking very little English - she managed to get out the question -"do you spin your beard?" And she did it with a small smile.

I have decided that it is an international phenomena. I might as well get use to it - it clearly is not going to stop being asked. Maybe I should ask the UN or the World Trade organization for some assistance in doing so research on this. Do Peruvian women get asked if there long hair gets caught up in their work, do rug weavers from the Middle East get asked if their beards get tangled up in their looms or is it just a western phenomena?

Food for thought......