That culture thing

This is only a topic I have mentioned multiple times before, but it comes up often and it still amuses me.

I’m teaching English conversation to a Korean couple (lovely people) and this week we worked on a few words related to common health issues, especially for the missionary community. =)  So of course, this included words like constipation, diarrhea, and so on.  We went over the words and then I said that while it was okay in the missionary/ex pat community, normally, Americans do not talk about this stuff and not in detail.

She looked at me in stunned amazement.  she was sure she didn’t understand me.  Then she thought I was joking.  I told her I was serious, we really don’t, and when other people do,  it makes many people uncomfortable.

“Why?’ she asked.  “It’s so important!”

I told her I didn’t know why we found it awkward and other people don’t.  IT doesn’t make sense, but it is the way it is.

“Oh.” she nodded and shrugged. “Custom.”

She might have murmured something in Korean under her breath, and it might have been translated as “Strange custom.”

Or maybe I was only mind-reading.

This is the same lovely friend that I embarrassed to the point of  shuddering goose-bumps by calling to my husband across a few meters of space at school, “Love you!  See you later!”  There wasn’t a crowd around, either, just two or three other people in the area.

Because you don’t say ‘I love you’ to your spouse in public like that. It’s awkward.


(she really is a sweet, sweet lady, and I shall miss her badly when we go back to the U.S.)


P.P. S. We are attempting to arrange our ducks in a row and work out an arrangement whereby we could continue to do some work for the school in the U.S. and come here for six months at a time instead of being away a year at a time.  There’s a lot of ducks to work out with that, so if you could pray with and for us that we are clear about where and how we can be used and work out next.  Thanks.

Posted in Davao Diary | 1 Response

When You Just Can’t Parody Anymore

I just finished a kindle book called The Narrative.  It’s parody, satire, or means to be.  It’s funny and it does poke enormous fun at the left, albeit not at all in a meanspirited way.  At least, I didn’t find it meanspirited. I found it down-right jolly.   But you’re only going to find it amusing if you already think the left is ridiculous.  It’s often heavy handed, but then sometimes it turns out what I thought was silly and over the top is pretty much straight out of real life.

One of the minor characters is a gal named Olive who has trained with GOO, the Global Outrage Organization, and learned some new protest techniques which the local protest leader is super excited about.  The group, hand in glove with a pair of reporters for the pet leftist network to film their antics,  goes to protest a local library.  The protest is over hiring a white male director (he turns out to be in a wheelchair, which surprises but does not stop them) and Olive engages in one of those new techniques- the voice grenade, which is just shrieking like a howling banshee for no good reason except to have a temper tantrum and prevent anybody else from speaking.  In several scenes in the book people respond to ideas they dislike by flinging themselves around and screaming like a two year old told it’s bedtime.  So over the top. Grown ups don’t act like- but wait.

See here- mind the sound, as there are a lot of F bombs mixed in the incoherent shrieking and howling.  Especially note starting around the 1:16 mark.


WATCH: Leftist Mob Screams At, Throws Drink On TPUSA’s Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens



Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Response

Ooops, he didn’t mean to say that


He accidentally said what liberals really do think:
A Santa Barbara city councilman inadvertently let slip the primary purpose of progressivism in 21st century America.

The city recently criminalized the use of plastic straws. Speaking to that issue, Councilman Jesse Dominguez said, “Unfortunately, common sense is just not common. We have to regulate every aspect of people’s lives.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Where’s Your Compassion

A man illegally crossed the border with his daughter. The story I found today doesn’t give her age, but I have seen another story saying she’s 14. She was hospitalized for a TB issue, and then it was discovered she was no relation to him, and he’s been raping her. Her mother handed her over to the monster, saying he’d find a job for her in the U.S.

I am not in favor of taking children from their parents without a really good reason. I am in favour of taking children from rapists, whether they are their parents or not. I think if it turns out the parent is a murderer, that’s also a pretty good reason. I recognize that children are deeply traumatized by being taken from their parents. I also recognize that some children are continuously traumatized by remaining with their parents or people posing as such, and that children being brought across the border have often already been deeply traumatized by their parents’ decision to bring them out of their home, country, culture, extended families (and often removing them from siblings and another parent).  The journey itself is fraught with traumatizing experiences:

From Huffpo:
“According to a stunning Fusion investigation, 80 percent of women and girls crossing into the U.S. by way of Mexico are raped during their journey. That’s up from a previous estimate of 60 percent, according to an Amnesty International report.”
The same report says that they know this in advance, so many of the women and girls take birth control pills in advance. So the chances that the children crossing the border unaccompanied or with their mothers have not already been deeply traumatized by that journey itself are pretty much non-existent.

In short, what I wish were reality isn’t reality and isn’t going to be.

I’d like instant DNA tests and dogs that work like drug sniffers, only they sniff out an abused child inerrantly and instantly snuggle up to the child and snarl and snap off the fingers of abusers who come near- these dogs would also have an inerrant ability to recognize abusers on sight. Better still, there’d be no abuse in the world at all.

But we don’t have that world. We have this one, and we have to muddle through the best way we can in the one that we have. In order to deal with the one we have, we have to have clear and accurate facts about it, not hysteria and fake news posing as a ‘metaphor.’
Of the ‘thousands’ of children separated from their parents at the border (closer to 2,000) by Trump (I guess we’re never going to look at Obama’s separations)- 102 were children under 5. I’m not excusing it, but I do think some perspective is in order- 102 children is not the hundreds and hundreds of sobbing toddlers and babies in diapers which the media and Trump haters attempted to paint us a picture of. Certainly the children should have been treated better and certainly Congress needs to fix themselves, but just as certainly, Congress never will because it’s too valuable a tool for both sides.

A judge has ruled that the children must be returned to their parents by a deadline which the government missed, and the judge allowed a slight extension. 52 or 54 of those children are to be reunited by this week if I read the dates correctly (a few articles say 34 kids, but the majority put the number in the low fifties).

Of those 104, 1 can’t be reunited because the child’s parent is planning to live with a known child sex offender. On purpose. Knowing that the person they will live with has a record of sexually abusing minor children. One can’t be reunited because the parents have been missing for a year (so this child was not part of the 2,000 removed at all? IT’s a strange one, I can’t find much more about this one, except that several news stories report it’s possible this child and the child’s parents are legal citizens).

10 cannot be reunited because their parents are incarcerated. They can be reunited when the parents are finished with their sentences, so they are basically like thousands of other American children in foster care while their parents are in jail.

14, FOURTEEN will not be reunited because the adults are either no relation to the children at all, have credible and serious child abuse evidence against them, or have criminal histories of charges like rape, murder, kidnapping.

Over a quarter of the children under 5 cannot or do not need to stay with the adults they crossed the border with. That’s pretty high. For some of the remaining childen, DNA tests and background checks are not yet complete, so that number could be higher.

Of those remaining, for about a dozen, they will be reunited but the timetable is delayed as their parents were already deported, and I find that inexcusable and horrible, just as horrible as the reality that some of these children were being raped to pay for their passage, were being brought in by traffickers posing as parents. I see every reason for DNA testing and criminal background checks, but none for deporting parents without their kids.

In spite of finding out that some of the kids are not related to the person who brought them across the border and cases like the one at the top of this post, where they are being abused and exploited, the judge ordering the reunification has told the Trump administration to drop the DNA tests to expedite the process.

If traffickers and coyotes knew that DNA tests would be part of the crossing process, fewer of them would try it, and I think it’s important to do what we can to deter this exploitation of children.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Can People Please Make Accurate Arguments

There’s a story in the news about a soon to be deported wife of a former Iraqi Vet, and also, the vet voted for Trump.  They’ve been married a long time (they have 16 and 8 year old daughters).  Her story is complicated by the fact that she has entered the U.S. illegally not once, but at least twice. The first time she was deported she signed a paper promising not to enter illegally again, and yet she did just a short time later. She says she was a teenager and was lied to about what she was signing and she didn’t speak English well enough to understand what she signed.  I can easily believe this to be true.  The problem is, I can also easily believe it to be what you would say if you changed your mind and needed to say something to make your previous promise go away.  Either way,  it’s a hard and sad story and I hate this for the kids especially.

But the world is a fallen and broken place full of hard and sad stories and we often are backed into a corner trying to come up with ideal solutions for things that are where they are because of less than ideal decisions made before us that we had no control over, and in an ideal world we would not need solutions at all.  And also, I get frustrated by the arguments on both sides.


Below are the typical twitter arguments and what I want to say to them.  The arguments are presented in no particular order and it’s my paraphrases, not exact quotes.

This doesn’t make sense. They’re married and he’s a citizen so she should be automatically granted a permanent residency (or citizenship, I’ve seen people insist this is The Rule both ways).  Something is fishy here.

See, that’s a Sandra Bullock movie, not a legal fact. Marriage to a citizen does not convey automatic residency rights to non-citizens. I don’t think it ever has in this country, or at least not for quite some now.  There are still processes to go through, questions to answer, facts to prove, hoops to jump.  It’s not fishy at all.  Happens all the time.  Maybe you think that’s how things should be, in which case, lobby your Congress critters to make it so, but some of you dismiss the story because you believed in an immigration fairy tale, and some of you want to blame the Trump administration for violating some imaginary status quo that never existed, and it’s super irksome on both sides. Forget about what you wish were true or what you’re willing to believe about Trump because you hate him and base your position in reality AS IT IS.

In fact, I did reply to three or four of these mistaken claims that marriage= legal status for illegal aliens and was told variously: thanks, that’s interesting, WHERE IS YOUR COMPASSION, so you’re just saying don’t fall in love with illegal aliens, right, and but what about Melania?

I am not making that up.

My replies: 1. you’re welcome, 2. in my left pinky toe which is obviously a larger compartment than the one for your logic 3. No, I didn’t say that, I just said that being married to a citizen is not automatic legal status for noncitizens 4. What? I have no idea what about Melania and I don’t care, either, but I do know she didn’t become a citizen just because she’s married to Trump. Sheesh.

Those were not all my replies, btw.  Especially not to the second question.  My answer to that was more along the lines of ‘I didn’t say anything about whether any of this is right or wrong or kind and good or evil. I just pointed out it’s an error to claim being married to a citizen conveyed any kind of legal resident status on her or anybody else.

I know I must be a cyborg compared to all the super feelings based emotional types on the internet, but I really just don’t even understand this approach.  Compassion has nothing to do with correcting this misinformation, it was merely a statement of what *is* to correct your statement about something that *is not*.

It’s not really compassionate, btw, to blather away about how marriage conveys citizenship so Trump is doing them dirty by denying her ‘right’ to stay when there is no such right or legal practice.  It’s bad advice, dangerous if somebody were stupid enough to trust you, and leading to a complacent sense of wellbeing in people who want to believe it’s true because it’s easier and sounds nice and comforting and how they wish things were.  But reality does not care about your comfort or your wishes.  Wherever you stand on immigration, and on this specific family and what’s happening to them, spouting things that are wrong about marriage conveying legal status automatically does not help anybody and facts are facts.

Tough luck, she had years to become a citizen and she didn’t do that.

I want a wall, but I hate this argument. It’s also wrong.  It really is not that easy. Becoming a citizen legally takes a lot of time and a lot of money, and they just might not have had enough of either.  Our legal pathway to citizenship is a lot more complicated and difficult than most people realize, and some people who think they want a wall wouldn’t want one at all if they realized how hard getting legal status is.

Furthermore, in her case, that piece of paper she signed promising not to return to the U.S. illegally probably stands between her and any attempt at the citizenship process.  She very well may not even have been eligible to try.

He’s served his country so she should automatically be granted citizenship.

On the one hand I am at first glance deeply sympathetic to this view.  On the other hand, after about ten seconds of thought I have to ask if you could join me in thinking about this more logically?  Can we stop and consider just why we might not to want to grant automatic legal status to just anybody who illegally enters the country and manages to snag a soldier?  Shouldn’t we investigate and be sure that people who have access to deployment plans and military bases are not here illegally?  Can you really not think of why that might be a good idea?  How soon might it be before a terrorist or a spy or fifty took advantage of these easy, careless, no questions or paperwork pathway to legal status?  Remember the active duty terrorist who shot up people at Ft. Hood?  What if he’d married an illegal alien?  There are reasons we vet would-be legal immigrants, and there are reasons people cross over illegally and not all of those reasons are because everybody crossing the border illegally is innocent.  That is a fact and a piece of reality that we have to consider .

Tough luck. He voted for Trump, so it serves them right.Deport them all.

And what a sweetheart you are.  So citizenship is something you would reserve only for people who vote the way you like, there are no other principles you hold to here?  That’s not a principle, and you and your ilk terrify me.


Oddly, this one often comes from the same people who are gloating over the family’s separation when they find out they supported Trump.  For me, I am a hard-eyed realist as well as a compassionate human being and what I wish is the case is far too often just not compatible with reality.  The real world, the world as it is, is a messy, complex, contradictory, and far from perfect place and sometimes we are trying to fix things, to unmake things, starting from a place we should not have to be at all.  I wish the family could stay together. I also wish she had obeyed the law all these years, and not crossed our borders illegally twice and already been deported (some stories say twice deported which is a bit excessive), and I wish she had given as much care and thought to her situation over the years as lots and lots of people are attempting to do now, and I wish there weren’t troublesome reasons why we need to vet people crossing our borders and I wish wishes were horses and that this family didn’t have to suffer.


This is no way to treat a war vet.

We can’t overlook the illegal behaviour of people based on who they married.  That isn’t compassion, it’s folly, and the sort of folly that can get people killed.

An unjust law is no law at all.

Sure.  But I do not believe that it is unjust for countries to have borders and laws about how to cross them and who may cross them and who can stay and how long.  Just stating unjust laws are bad doesn’t prove anything about this one.  That’s called begging the question, assuming as true the very point that you haven’t established is true at all ,the very point of discussion.

But it’s so sad.

Oh, it is.  It is very, very sad. I have to wonder why her illegal choices and his knowledge of them is now my fault, though.  They knew the risk they were taking, and I very much wish that had paid off for their kids, but I didn’t do this to them, and I’m not the cause of their suffering.  Start a go fund me to pay for transportation for the husband and teenager to join the family in Mexico, I’ll contribute.  Start a petition stating she has no other reasons to deny her citizenship and asking Trump to let her stay, and I’ll sign it.  Beat my chest and wear a hair shirt of guilt and agony over this, I will not. She broke the law and she knew she was breaking it and she knew she could be deported. So did he (he was also here illegally and he became a citizen just before joining the military).

But it’s not like nobody warned her she could be deported.  It had already happened, she knew it could happen again, and she chose that risk.  I’m not saying ‘well tough, she got what she deserved,’ but I am saying, “Why is this my fault?”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

  • Amazon: Buy our Kindle Books

  • Search Amazon

    Try Audible and Get Two Free Audiobooks

  • Brainy Fridays Recommends:

  • Search: