Sunday, August 14, 2005

Post-Traumatic Transformation: Cindy Sheehan

Most of you are probably up on Cindy Sheehan's protest outside of George Bush's Crawford ranch. Many other bloggers are tracking the progress and happenings of Sheehan's protest, including the Code Pink. I am wholly supportive and quite impressed with Sheehan's determination to give a voice to countless other mothers and fathers who have children in Iraq or lost children in Iraq. I haven't really had anything profound to say about this event.

However, an article in the York Daily News caught my eye with its headline: "A grieving mom or a political activist?" (Btw, the original article, in the WaPo has a different title!) The title suggests there is only "one" answer to the question, by presenting the issue as X or Y. Why can't Sheehan be both? In fact, I would argue that X (grieving mother) is the catalyst for Y (political activist.)

Not too long ago I was talking to a woman who works at Vicitim Witness Assistance, a social service agency that advocates for women, men or children who have been vicitms of assault (they help victims with the courts, legal representation, counseling, etc).

One of the observations that this woman made was that she saw less cases of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and more inspiring cases of Post-Traumatic Transformation. Many find great strength and power out of tragedy. One woman whose young daughter was murdered by her husband, after she fled, has now become a committed advocate of victims' rights and offers her time up regularly to speak to young children about violence in relationships. She has dedicated her life to prevent this sort of tragedy from befalling another mother or father.

Sheehan, thank goodness, is out there doing the same noble and brave work. The political spin-meisters out there, trying to paint what she is doing as blatant "political activism" make me sick. First of all, what is wrong with "political activism"? Surely the left aren't the only activists out there. Secondly, how dare these pundits question the grief of a woman who lost her son in War? Have any of the loudest critics lost children too?

In our darkest moments, we may find a new and more courageous self emerging. Cindy Sheehan is one of those amazing Post-Traumatic Transformers. And, she is my hero.

UPDATE: Read BlondeSense's post on this. And, check out this picture at the Daily Kos of the crosses that a pro-war protestor smashed into.

4 comments:

  1. Thank you for supporting Cindy. Courage comes from your heart.......and sometimes a trajedy motivates inspires one to do great things.

    best wishes marie

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous5:20 PM

    Nice post. Although I don't always agree with your views, I think your insight that a person can be both tragically affected by an event and also a political activist toward the policies surrounding that event is very important.

    The more "conservative" blogs, which I agree with more frequently, have totally missed / supressed this point, and it makes them seem foolish.

    I'll be reading.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Diomed--

    My response is no different than what I put in my post. This sort of spin on Cindy Sheehan--particularly digging into her family life--makes me sick.

    --Aspazia

    ReplyDelete
  4. Diomed--

    Ok, let's consider these questions:

    "Should an activist ever take a step-back to evaluate the toll a crusade is taking on those around them?"

    Certainly, one should evaluate his/her actions all the time. But, now you imply that one should halt action, (or you said "crusade")if it is taking a toll on those around you. I don't necessarily agree with you here, although in particular cases we might agree. Socrates (yes, I love him!) discussed this very issue in the Crito. His conclusion is that justice is worth dying for. Hopefully Cindy won't die for this cause, although with the recent violent action carried out at Camp Casey, one cannot be certain. Perhaps Cindy believes that what she is doing is, in the longterm, what is important to do for her family, her loved ones, and her country.

    "Is it selfish to continue on any type campaign if it is doing damage to an activist's love ones?"

    This is such a fuzzy question and can only yield fuzzy answers. What constitutes doing damage? Who is the arbiter over competing interpretations of what is damaging?

    The most important question, in my mind, is: why would right-wing pundits go so low as to dig up dirt about her personal life"? Obviously, they are willing to sink to such depraved depths because they are AFRAID of her success--that she is resonating with the people.

    ReplyDelete