Hasta La Gadget!

I was much older when I first recognized the voice of the inner critic. I’d known it for so long that I believed it to be my own.

My later studies in psychology and working with wonderful women made me realize that we all carried this voice in our heads. Denying it or challenging it was often a waste of time. Listening to it gave it an attention it didn’t often deserve. What did work was understanding where it came from, because that gave us the power to move beyond its fears.

The Early Beginnings
And here’s why. Beginning very early in our childhood, we all experience some form of shaming, like when parents give us that aghast expression and shout “Never do that again” or shake their heads with “I expected better from you”. Its natural and its important, because it stops us from many of the things that are harmful for us. Research even suggests that children who grow up with no shaming are less resilient and unable to cope with feedback and criticism.

The problem arises when shaming happens without repair – when parents forget to tell us that they love us regardless. When they’re unable to tune in to our feelings and let us know that it’s okay. When they overlook the importance of reinstating their belief in us and of reminding us of our goodness. We’re left with the feeling that our weaknesses define us and develop a skewed perception of our abilities and qualities.

What makes it worse is that many times parents criticize endlessly because they cast their own fears and the unhealed parts of their own selves onto us. And as little sponges, we absorb these fears and try our best to stay away from them by developing our own voice of criticism that begins to occupy most of our self-talk. That’s why it sounds so true and lasts long after we leave home.

Our Later Years
As we grow older, we begin to shame and reject parts of ourselves we don’t like in order to be accepted by friends, teachers, and society. And without the inner safety of believing in our qualities and abilities, we try and safeguard our sense of self through whatever external expectations we grow up with. “Make sure your work is perfect”, “Better not make a fool of yourself” and “Fix that lousy body” become internal demands that disconnect us from who we are.

What started out as an interpersonal relationship of dominance and subordination between parent and child eventually becomes our own relationship with ourselves. And just like it closed us down so we stay away from “harm”, we shut down and stay away from experiences. We doubt our lovability and competence and keep ourselves safe by playing by external rules. And worst of all, we go on to replicate the same relationship in our marriages and families.

The Way Out
Here’s what we need to do to end the war within ourselves. First, we need to recognize the voice of the inner critic and befriend it. Remember, it’s the voice that kept us safe when we were too little to recognize danger. It still reminds us of our weaknesses, and we mustn’t ignore it. But it can get stuck in old and well-wired neural patterns, and fear something that’s no longer true. Or it can become terribly loud and mean, and cloud our thinking simply because we believe it to be true. Our best bet is to listen to it and hold its concerns in perspective.

We then need to pay attention to our strengths – the ones that the inner critic never allowed us to befriend. What are the values that guide us, the strengths that lie deep within us, and the passions that bring us alive? What makes us who we are, different, bright and beautiful? This is not always easy, especially when we’ve never paid attention to our strengths, nor listened to the softer, gentler voice of the inner mentor that reminds us that we have what it takes to face our challenges.

Essentially, we’ve to grow up and become the parent who scolds us when faced with danger, but then sits us down on their warm lap and reminds us of all the qualities and abilities that can guide us forward. Sometimes we’ve to train ourselves to be that parent, because we’ve forgotten their warm embrace, or because we never got it in the first place. Without this inner parent, we’d never recognize the inner child that holds the key to our true and authentic selves.

We’re all works in progress, often driving with the brakes on. To let go and unleash our full potential, we’ve got to take the whole of us along on the journey, brakes, accelerator, fears, gifts and all. We’re weaker when we’re not all in – fragile both in perfection and in flaws. Appreciating our wholeness is the only way we can co-exist in harmony within ourselves, and bring our full selves to life.

Do you struggle with an inner critic? What have you tried, what has worked, and what would you want to do differently? I’d love to hear back from you!

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

“Are you guys OK???”

On July 21, 2012, I woke up to that text from my cousin, Brett. I texted him back that we were fine.

My first thoughts were, “Where? Who?” But not why or what. Because I knew it was a shooting. What else would it be? And the why… there is no answer to that. The only “why” that I need an answer for is why do we allow it to keep happening? WHY?

The theatre that James Eagan Holmes shot up in Aurora, Colorado is twenty minutes from our house. Twenty minutes.

I didn’t see a movie in a theater after that for a long time.

“Look if something happens, just don’t do anything stupid, okay?” I say to Roy the first time we see a movie after the shooting.

“What do you mean?” Roy asked.

“Just don’t try to be a hero. If something ever happens, you just do what you need to get out safely.”

“Michael…” he started and gave me that look. I knew the look. “You can’t ask me that.”

But I was. I wanted to be selfish and it was such a Roy thing to do — for anyone. Without thinking. And my only thoughts were: It can’t happen to you.

But would I act any differently? Probably not. But if Roy promised me that he would just go – escape, I would promise him the same.

“Well I’m not leaving if you don’t,” I huffed. “Just know that. You stay, I stay. You die, I die.”
Because I would die for him, just like I would live for him.

And then the movie started.

***

I grew up in Nebraska, and was openly gay from a very young age back in the nineties. You know before things “got better.”

Before I was a teenager I had been threatened, ambushed and beaten in public. In school, I was teased harassed and mercilessly bullied, by both students and a few teachers.

“He’s chosen a hard life,” Ms. K said to my parents at Parent-Teacher conferences. Last I knew, being gay isn’t a choice. Did I choose for people to call me a faggot? Did I choose to be slammed against lockers or book-checked, to have my things stolen or destroyed; to have people put glue in my hair? Did I ask for kids to pull pranks and then say I was the culprit to try and get me expelled? Did I choose to have to switch buses? What about my “hard life” was a choice I made? Because really, it seems that my “hard life” was actually caused by a lot of others making choices based in fear and ignorance and hate. Those are choices I choose not to make.

***

I don’t understand. On June 12 this thought played on a loop in my head.

On December 14, 2012 Adam Lanza walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S. And he opened fire. Twenty-eight lives were stolen that day. Twenty of them were children who were only six or seven years old. I wonder what those twenty children would have achieved had they lived.

After we as a country cried, “Never Again!”

We lied.

Since Sandy Hook there have been 998 mass shootings in the United States, as defined by Gun Violence Archive. Three of the ten deadliest mass shootings in the United States, including the shooting in Orlando on June 12, have occurred AFTER Sandy Hook.

I don’t understand.

***

I’ve never understood religious extremists or those who do hateful things in the name of God. I’ll admit God and I aren’t all that tight in an official capacity. We used to be, until the priest at my church told me being gay was an instant access pass to Hell.

When a Catholic becomes of age (eighth grade) they are supposed to get confirmed. Confirmation is all about the person being old enough to pledge their life to God in the Catholic faith. Why would I want to be a member of an organization that told me my very existence was a sin?
But my parents were insistent and arranged for me to talk with the monsignor at my church. The meeting did not go very well (who would have thought, right?).

“What are some of your concerns with our doctrine,” Monsignor started, folding his hands.

“I think there is a lot of contradictory teachings and that the church actively promotes prejudice that I’m not okay with.”

“Such as?”

“Well for example, homosexuality. I completely disagree with the church’s stance on that.”

“Well, what is there to be confused about? Homosexuality is unnatural and not what God would want. Man and woman were created to procreate and that is what the act of love is for nothing else.”

“How is it unnatural?”

“Well, you cannot conceive a child through homosexual…”

“Sex,” I finished.

He turned red, “Yes, that.”

“So for couples who cannot have children, or older couples who have been married for four decades and can no longer procreate; people like that should not express love physically for one another?”

“N-no, that’s not what I meant,” he began.

“But you said the act of intercourse was only meant for procreation. So straight couples who can no longer procreate shouldn’t have sex. By your definition it is the same sin as homosexual sex.”
“The act of intercourse between a man and a woman is like this.” He took a finger on one hand and put it through the circle that his fingers on the other hand made. “It is natural and works.” Then he stuck out a finger on each hand and said, “See this doesn’t work.”

“Actually,” I corrected, “that is not how gay men have sex, it works like this,” and I made the same motion he had for the straight couple. “It’s just a different hole.”

Even though I feel like Catholic leaders are misguided in their viewpoints they don’t exactly spread the message, “Shoot ’em up!” But I have met my fair share of Catholics and Christians who truly feel like that is a solution.

“We should just round them all up and put them on an island, and nuke it!”

Do you want to know who said this? Fine, but I’ll need to know which time. I’ve been told this by “believers” (in person) more than fourteen times by eight different people. Did you want the time on the school bus when I was in sixth grade? Ninth grade? In my college dorms? Freshman, sophomore or junior years?

With different religious cult and hate groups, it is hardly a surprise that such hate exists. But it doesn’t mean I have to understand it, because I don’t. I think I’d be afraid if I did.

***

Before people started talking…

Aug. 1, 1966: University of Texas Tower in Austin, Texas. 14 people killed; 31 wounded.

July 18, 1984: McDonald’s restaurant in San Ysidro, California. 21 people killed; 19 wounded.

April 20, 1999: Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. 15 people killed; 24 wounded.

In the midst of a conversation…

April 16, 2007: Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia. 33 people killed; 17 injured.

Nov. 5, 2009: Fort Hood military base in Fort Hood, Texas. 13 people killed; 30 wounded.

Dec. 14, 2012: Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. 28 people killed; 2 injured.

What “Never Again” could have prevented…

Sept. 16, 2013: Washington Navy Yard in Washington, D.C. 13 people killed.

Dec. 2, 2015: Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California. 16 people killed; 24 injured.

June 12, 2016: Pulse Orlando nightclub in Orlando, Florida. 49 people killed; 53 injured.

Gun sense is common sense. No one is trying to take away a person’s second amendment rights, but those rights should be come with rules to protect people — as well as limits. No civilian needs to have access to weapons of mass destruction. They don’t need machine guns or assault rifles that can kill dozens in seconds. They just don’t.

If they’re weapons collectors – so what. A nuclear device is a weapon, are we going to permit civilian weapon collectors to have access to those too? Where does it end?

After every mass shooting there is some call to action. People who believe and say, “Enough is enough.” So why is this still happening?

We need to ban the types of guns that no one has a legitimate reason to own. This seems to simple to me, but it’s not.

Gun reform organizations like Everytown and Moms Demand Action haven’t even touched that yet. Why? Because they’re fighting for background checks on gun licenses and permits. But shouldn’t this be easily obtained? It’s not a law already? According to Everytown.org 92% of the public and 82% of gun owners support background checks, so what’s the deal? Each time a background check bill is introduced, it’s blocked by the NRA.

Because they have the right to make money. But how can money matter more than all the lives touched by gun violence?

Wake up, America! How many more lives need to be sacrificed before we do?

***

I’m so used to hate geared at me that it kind of runs off upon impact. That shouldn’t be the reaction I have. Shouldn’t being called a faggot still bother me? Deviant? Pervert? Should I feel threatened when some redneck in his truck acts like he is going to run me down?

After Roy and I got engaged we both invited every member of our families, knowing that many would not attend because of their personal objections. My family didn’t bother to RSVP back – they ignored it. Others just said they did not plan to attend. Roy’s Aunt Jane however chose to let Roy know she was superior and his deviance made her terrified for his soul.

I opened the letter she sent to him. I knew what was in it. Misguided, ignorant hateful garbage in the name of God. I thought, “No big deal.” It would be entertaining.

If it had been me, it would have been entertaining. As she wrote about “praying” for him and begging to let her help him repent and save him from eternal damnation I became enraged. How dare she say these things to Roy! I wanted to write some witty apology actually quoting the Bible, which I know quite well. I wanted to write her such a letter saying I was praying for her because she was twisting the words of the Lord for some petty hateful crap.

I wanted to spare Roy the letter but he already knew it arrived. When he got home he read it. It rolled off his back. But I was still angry. I realized it was fine for someone to come at me with a bat, but say an offhanded comment to Roy and I would lose my shit. Love is funny that way.
The rest of Roy’s family is great, overall much better than my own. But sometimes there is still that disconnect. Last month when we were visiting, we had dinner with Roy’s aunt, uncle and grandmother. His aunt is wonderful: loving, welcoming and I feel very close to her. But she doesn’t understand that it’s still us against the world. We got married when it wasn’t legal. Because screw being legally married, it was a promise we made to each other in front of our loved ones. That was all that mattered.

At dinner she wanted to know why I was voting Democrat, regardless of who won the nomination and my feelings for that person.

“But are you really happy with where our country is headed?” She asked me. (She meant economically.)

There was nowhere to go with this. I would never change her viewpoint and she would never change mine. And quite frankly I didn’t want to talk about it because it hit too close to home. For me politics are personal.

“I understand what you’re saying,” I said, “but the economy or every other issue will always take a backseat to my civil rights. Every GOP candidate makes my life a political issue. Each one has stated they intend to fight the Supreme Court ruling, which was just made last year, stating I had the right to be married. In some places we can’t adopt kids. In many places we can be fired for just being gay.”

“You can be fired?”

“Yes.”

“Where?”

“I don’t know offhand, but I can send you a list,” I said, hoping that would be the end. I didn’t want to tell her that I didn’t know EVERY state that still allowed this type of discrimination, but I knew that her home state of Florida is one of them; so is Nebraska.

The answer is 28 states. You can be fired for being gay in 28 states. Ironically just two weeks after the visit, Congress voted against passing a non-discrimination amendment protecting LGBT people. All the no’s were from Republicans.

I haven’t sent her the email because I love her. But she doesn’t get it. My life – Roy’s life will always come first on every other political issue.

Maybe after Orlando I need to rethink this.

In 45 states, you can openly carry a firearm.

In 37 states, you can buy and use that firearm without a license.

In 32 states, you can buy a gun at a gun show from a “private seller” without a background check.

I don’t understand how the rights of gun owners supersede my right to breathe. To go on living.

To not being gunned down for no other reason than being who I am; than living in America.

***

Around 2:00 a.m. on June 12, 2016, Omar Mir Seddique Mateen opened fire inside Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida. He killed 49 people, and injured 53 others.

But this is just another shooting, right? I mean they’re part of our culture in America. What’s one more?

Why is this an understandable reaction? “Another” should not be a word we use so casually with such a tragedy. Why do we need gun safety drills instead of severe weather or fire drills? Why are so many people accepting of the use of “another”? I want a day when a mass shooting is novel. It’s awful and horrible and so “strange” and unfamiliar.

But in all honesty, this was not just another shooting. It was “special”. This attack is the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history. It is the deadliest incident of violence against LGBT people. It is the deadliest terror attack on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001. Please take a minute… let that sink in.

Now do you find this to be tragic? Upsetting? Are you thinking of the victims and their loved ones? Are you thinking the victims deserved to die?

Because there are quite a few people who do.

“Gays don’t deserve to live.”

“Good thing… less gays in the world today.”

“Homosexuality is condemned by God that’s why he let it happen ppl.”

“God opened his armory to deal with proud fag America.”

“I think the gunman did a good job.”

“Gays should be shot for disrespecting the natural order.”

“I’m so happy someone decided to start shooting perverts instead of innocent people.”

“The shooter is my hero.”

Never has a mass shooting elicited so much support — for the shooter.

You think these voices are the few, but they’re not. They are many. But these voices are important. They show exactly what it is like to be gay in the world today.

And let’s not forget that any one of these people can go out and buy a gun. I mean, what’s stopping them?

June is LGBT PRIDE Month. A lot of people wonder why we need to have PRIDE. This is WHY we need PRIDE. This is why we come out. This is why we stand up. Because we cannot live in fear. Because we are who we are and just want what the same rights as everyone else. We love who we love, but it is still love.

This attack — this is why we keep standing up. We keep fighting and celebrating who we are. Why we don’t back down and refuse to stay silent. This is why.

***

Love is the point — of everything. It is the meaning to life — to love and be loved. It drives us, keeps us going, whether in a quest to find it or being aware and grateful for all of the love around us. The greatest achievements and contributions to humanity have come from love. Love of others, love of self, love as a passion or calling.

I wonder what would happen if everyone who hated someone decided to love them instead. I think then the NRA would be screwed. No more need for guns at all. Because I do agree that guns don’t kill people, people kill people. But wow, do guns make it so much easier to kill a great number of people quickly and effectively.

For now I am taking my love and I am sitting here just not understanding.

I don’t understand hating someone so fiercely you want to end their life. Even someone who has wronged you in the vilest ways. But strangers? People just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time? People you are judging as sinners, when most religions promote love and acceptance before people twist it to fit their ignorant agendas?

I don’t understand the loss. Why it has to keep happening. I don’t understand. The hate. The senseless death. Any of it. I don’t. My heart is (breaking) with Orlando and the rest of my community as we grieve and seek to understand what cannot be understood.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Actress Diane Keaton spoke openly about her current sex life and her preferences in lovers on an episode of “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” airing.

With glasses of her namesake “The Keaton” wine flowing freely, the 70-year-old got pretty candid with host Ellen, who is also her costar in the new film “Finding Dory.”

Keaton’s wine is meant to be served on ice, which she says she loves to chew on. 

“They say that when you chew ice it means you’re sexually frustrated,” DeGeneres said.

“I am sexually frustrated,” Keaton replied. 

Though she says she’s had “so many” lovers in the past, she admits it’s not always easy these days to find dates with “sexually interested men.”

DeGeneres then invited the actress to play a fun game of “Who’d You Rather,” featuring a slew of handsome men of all ages, from Justin Bieber and Leonardo DiCaprio, to Al Pacino and Jack Nicholson. Last year she told DeGeneres she’d be willing to consider marriage if Channing Tatum was available. (Sorry, Diane. He’s not.)

Check out the videos above to see who Keaton says she has a “special feeling” for.

Gentlemen, Keaton is single and ready to mingle.  

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Colorism: You’re Cute To Be Dark

© Irina Bogolapova | Dreamstime.com

There was a time in my life when I didn’t lovingly embrace my dark skin. During my adolescent years, I was under the impression that lighter meant better. To me, lighter skin equaled automatic beauty and popularity. It wasn’t until I was much older that I realized one’s skin tone doesn’t define a person — character does. Furthermore, beauty comes in all shapes, colors, ages and sizes — it is not synonymous with one group.

I haven’t been able to pinpoint what caused the distorted view of myself and skin tones in general. Could it be that I didn’t receive enough affirmation as a child? I also wonder if it was because I didn’t see darker-skinned Black women glamourized when I was younger. Or could it possibly be something much deeper? Could being aware of Black history have an effect on how some of us view ourselves within our race?

For an example; if I had been alive during slavery, I would have been in the field picking cotton and chopping down tobacco — I would not have been working in the master’s house away from the brunt of the weather. I can only imagine the impact that had on darker-skinned Blacks. I would think the separation within our race based on skin tone created a sense of inferiority in darker-skinned Blacks and possibly a sense of superiority in fairer skinned Blacks. And I wonder if that mindset was inadvertently passed onto future generations because our ancestors were conditioned to segregation amongst themselves. The fact of the matter is, slavery existed several decades ago, but we as Black people are still fighting the remnants of it — colorism being one of them.

There were two occasions in my life when I was told by two different males that I was “cute to be dark.” At the time, I didn’t argue with them or even question their statement, but it obviously stuck in my mind. The incident is mind-boggling for several reasons; one being the fact that I encountered two different Black males who, at the time, didn’t necessarily believe dark-skinned women could be attractive.

Furthermore, one of the individuals is darker than me, and his mother and sister are dark-skinned as well. How did he view his mother and sister? What caused this belief? Don’t get me wrong, I understand there are people who have preferences but telling me, “You’re cute to be dark,” goes beyond preference. And what about the lighter-skinned guy? What had he been conditioned to for him to make the same statement? And I am very confident in saying I am not the only dark-skinned Black woman to be told, “You’re a pretty dark-skinned girl.” Huh? — is that supposed to be an oxymoron or something?

I remember watching the movie School Daze when I was 12. I admit that I didn’t get the message of the movie back then, but it addresses some interesting details in regards to skin tone among Blacks. One of the things that stood out the most to me is the actresses in the “Good and Bad Hair” scene. The women who played the” jigaboos” were mostly dark-skinned and depicted as wallflower-ish. But, the “wannabes” were mostly light-skinned and glamour-ish looking. I discovered something interesting about myself when I watched the aforementioned scene while researching this topic – there are dark-skinned women depicted as “wannabes” and light-skinned women depicted as “jigaboos” – I hadn’t noticed that before. Was I that blinded by my distorted belief? Am I the only one who didn’t notice?

Now I realize the importance of loving and embracing myself as I am. I also recognize the idiocy behind wishing I was someone else or even slightly different from who I am. Mainly because God doesn’t make mistakes, but in addition to that, we don’t know what it takes to be the person whose life we covet.

So, what do we do? What can we do? Is this behavior breakable?

I think it is ridiculous to complain about the lack of respect and acceptance from other races when we are divided within our own. I think we should teach and demonstrate self-acceptance and love in conjunction with embracing the differences we see in others within our race. We should spend our energy embracing and appreciating the beauty of our differences.

The truth of the matter is, no one is better than anyone else. Lighter isn’t better than darker or vice versa. Let’s teach and practice seeing each other in our simplest form — human. We’re all just dust anyway.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

MEXICO CITY — More than 200 scientists, writers and artists have signed a letter addressed to Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, U.S. President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in advance of the North American Leaders’ Summit in Ottawa later this month.

The signers urge that swift and energetic actions be taken to save the monarch butterfly from the threats that endanger its survival. All three countries must work together to mitigate the loss of the butterflies’ breeding habitat and to terminate all logging and mining in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve in Michoacan, Mexico.

Among the many signers are Margaret Atwood, Robert F. Kennedy, J.M.G. Le Clézio (Nobel Prize), Bill McKibben, Michael Ondaatje, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, John Ashbery, Yann Martel and Simon Schama. The letter is reproduced in full below.

President Barack Obama
President Enrique Peña Nieto
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

Honorable Gentlemen:

At the North American Leaders’ Summit held in Toluca, Mexico, on February 19, 2014, President Barack Obama, President Enrique Peña Nieto and Prime Minister Stephen Harper made the following commitment in their joint closing statement:

“Our governments will establish a working group to ensure the conservation of the Monarch butterfly, a species that symbolizes our association.”

The three heads of state were responding to the deep concern expressed in a letter signed by several hundred international monarch experts, scientists, writers and artists; the letter urged these leaders to address the future of the monarch butterfly and recommended the creation of a recognized breeding corridor along the monarch’s migratory route through Canada, the United States and Mexico. High Level Monarch Working Groups were then established in each country; national and trinational meetings are being held; and research and monitoring of monarchs have continued.

The need for effective action has become even more critical.

Conservation activities to protect the monarch butterfly are underway in all three countries, but the need for effective action has become even more critical. Earlier this year, a group of scientists predicted that “the Eastern migratory population has a substantial probability of quasi-extinction,” warning that this population must increase to at least 225 million to reduce the risk of extinction by half and to prevent the loss of a viable migratory population. The overwintering abundance of monarchs has shown a 20-year decline from 900 million in 1996-97 to 33 million in 2013-14. Although optimal weather conditions on the migratory route enabled the population to recover to 140 million during the winter of 2015-16, a severe and unusually late March storm reduced this winter’s abundance by up to 50 percent, illustrating the risk to survival of a diminished monarch migratory phenomenon.

Conservation and Threats

In the U.S., a June, 2014, Presidential Memorandum established a Pollinator Health Task Force, and the Task Force launched the National Strategy to Promote the Health of Honey Bees and Other Pollinators on May 19, 2015. One of the stated goals of the Strategy is to “increase the Eastern population of the monarch butterfly to 225 million butterflies occupying an area of 6 hectares in the overwintering grounds in Mexico, through domestic/international actions and public-private partnerships, by 2020.”

A principal cause of the 90 percent plunge in monarch numbers over the last 20 years is the massive use of glyphosate herbicides on land in the U.S. corn belt planted with genetically modified herbicide-resistant soybean and corn crops. Extensive spraying of these crops in the major summer breeding area of these butterflies has decimated milkweed, which is the only foodplant that monarch caterpillars can eat. New generation crops are being developed to resist additional herbicides, so the threat to milkweeds is increasing.

Concern about declining milkweed habitat led to a petition being submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on August 26, 2014, requesting that the monarch butterfly be listed as threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The petition described the urgent need for federal protection; consideration of the petition is underway.

In April, 2015, Mexican (Grupo de los Cien, Alternare, Danaidas, Conservación y Desarrollo Sustentable, Costasalvaje and Telar Social México), American (Natural Resources Defense Council) and Canadian (David Suzuki Foundation) groups formally petitioned UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee to list the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve World Heritage Site on the List of World Heritage Sites in Danger. In a letter to the World Heritage Centre, pollinator and monarch scientists endorsed the petition and asked that Mexico, the United States and Canada strengthen collaborative efforts to protect and restore monarch habitat.

In Mexico, degradation of the overwintering sites continues despite official assurances that illegal logging is under control. Recently, scientists have confirmed that 10 hectares of mature forest on land belonging to the state of Michoacan were severely logged in 2015. Observers have also found small-scale logging in the Reserve, with both forms of logging damaging the protective forest canopy.

Furthermore, an unusually severe snow and rain storm in March, 2016, blew down numerous oyamel fir and pine trees. A week later, the Reserve’s acting director authorized salvage logging; subsequent photographs have shown that salvage logging has seriously degraded the forest floor. In contrast, allowing protected areas to regenerate naturally is a preferable management option to salvage logging for this rich oyamel fir-pine ecosystem. Continuing logging activities underscore the need for enforcing year-round protection of the forest throughout the Reserve.

Monarchs are facing a new potentially lethal threat to their overwintering habitat. In 2007, the Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources awarded Grupo Mexico, Mexico’s largest mining corporation, a concession to reopen an old mine in Angangueo, to mine copper, zinc, lead, silver and gold beneath the core zone of the Reserve. The mining process will extract large volumes of water from the subsoil and expel it outside the area being worked, but water is vital for overwintering monarchs and for maintaining the surrounding forest ecosystem. There is no precedent for exposing overwintering monarch butterflies to a major mining operation, and the Environmental Impact Assessment does not address the inevitable harmful consequences to the butterflies, which are the reason for existence of the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve.

Need for Action

The three North American heads of state will meet on June 29, 2016, in Ottawa, their first joint meeting since 2014. We, the undersigned scientists, writers, artists and concerned citizens, call upon President Enrique Peña Nieto, President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to take swift and energetic actions to preserve the monarch’s migratory phenomenon. Success will require activity within all three countries: mitigation of the loss of breeding habitat due to milkweed-killing herbicide usage by protecting parcels of land with milkweeds and native nectar sources; termination of all logging in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve; and a prohibition of mining in the Reserve. Leadership responding to these challenges is crucial; monarch butterflies are among the most extraordinary and iconic creatures on the planet, beloved by many, and they represent a fundamental connection of our three countries.

Sincerely yours,

Homero Aridjis — Writer; President, Grupo de los Cien; Former Mexican Ambassador to Switzerland, The Netherlands and UNESCO; President Emeritus, PEN International; Member, High Level Monarch Working Group (Mexico)

Professor Lincoln P. Brower — Research Professor of Biology, Sweet Briar College; Distinguished Service Professor of Zoology Emeritus, University of Florida

Professor Ernest H. Williams — William R. Kenan Professor Emeritus of Biology, Dept. of Biology, Hamilton College

Signers:

INTERNATIONAL MONARCH BUTTERFLY SCIENTISTS

Dr. John Alcock. Arizona State University, Dr. Alfonso Alonso, Smithsonian Institution, Dr. Sonia M. Altizer, University of Georgia, Dr. Michael Boppre, University of Freiburg, Germany, Dr. Lincoln P. Brower, Sweet Briar College, Dr. Linda S. Fink, Sweet Briar College, Dr. Barrie Frost, Queens University, Ontario, Canada, Dr. Jordi Honey-Roses, University of British Columbia, Canada, Dr. Pablo F. Jaramillo-López, UNAM, Michoacán, Mexico, Dr. Stephen B. Malcolm, Western Michigan University, Dr. Karen Oberhauser, University of Minnesota, Dr, John Pleasants, Iowa State University, Dr. Robert M. Pyle, Grays River, Washington, Dr. Isabel Ramirez, UNAM, Michoacán, Mexico, Dr. Daniel Slayback, Science Systems & Applications, Inc., Maryland, Dr. Stuart B. Weiss, Creekside Center for Earth Observations, California, Dr. Ernest H. Williams, Hamilton College, USA, Dr. Dick Vane-Wright, the Natural History Museum, London, UK, Dr. Myron P. Zalucki, University of Queensland, Australia.

WRITERS AND ARTISTS

U.S.:

Nova Ami, Kwame Anthony Appiah, John Ashbery, Paul Auster, Deirdre Bair, Russell Banks, Magda Bogin, Christopher Cokinos, Robert Darnton, Alison Hawthorne Deming, Rita Dove, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Patrick Flanery, Francisco Goldman, Mimi Gross, Jessica Hagedorn, Sue Halpern, Sam Hamill, Robert Hass, Tom Hayden, Brenda Hillman, Edward Hirsch, Siri Hustvedt, Ilya Kaminsky, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Nicole Krauss, Jonathan Levi, Roberto Lovato, Amy Evans McClure, Michael McClure, Bill McKibben, Jeff McMillan, Molly Moore, David Rieff, Velcrow Ripper, Diane Rothenberg, Jerome Rothenberg, Dick Russell, Michael Scammell, Alex Shoumatoff, A. E. Stallings, Judith Thurman, Melissa Tuckey, Chase Twichell, Gwynedd Vetter-Drusch (Moving for Monarchs), Chuck Wachtel, Rosanna Warren, Alan Weisman, Terry Tempest Williams, City Lights Books.

Mexico:

Homero Aridjis, Lucia Alvarez, Juan Domingo Arguelles, Chloe Aridjis, Eva Aridjis, Alberto Blanco, Miguel Calderón, Marco Antonio Campos, Jennifer Clement, Elsa Cross, María José Cuevas, Ximena Cuevas, Laura Esquivel, Manuel Felguérez, Betty Ferber, Rubén Gallo, Emiliano Gironella, Jose Gordon, Roger von Gunten, Barbara Jacobs, Gabriela Jauregui, Daniel Krauze, León Krauze, Pura López Colomé, Jean Meyer, Marina Meyer, Matias Meyer, Pablo Meyer, Humberto Musacchio, Margarita de Orellana, Carmen Parra, Fernado del Paso, Paulina del Paso, Elena Poniatowska, Vicente Rojo, Betsabée Romero, Cristina Rubalcava, Juan Carlos Rulfo, Pablo Rulfo, Alberto Ruy Sánchez, Francisco Segovia, Isabel Turrent.

Canada:

Margaret Atwood, Ann Eriksson, Gary Geddes, Graeme Gibson, Terence Gower, Emile Martel, Yann Martel, George McWhirter, Michael Ondaatje, John Ralston Saul, Linda Spalding, Alison Wearing, Barbara Williams.

Other countries:

J. M. G. Le Clézio (Nobel Prize, France), Giuseppe Bellini (Italy), Breyten Breytenbach (South Africa), Vicente Cervera (Spain), Claudia Comes (Spain), Fabrizio Dall’Aglio (Italy), Kjell Espmark (Sweden), Ruth Fainlight (United Kingdom), Francisco de Asís Fernández (Nicaragua), Maneka Sanjay Gandhi (Minister for Women and Child Welfare, Government of India), Gloria Guardia (Panama), Antony Gormley (United Kingdom), Stratis Haviaras (Greece), Philip Hoare (United Kingdom), Laurens van Krevelen (Netherlands), Klaus Kropfinger (Germany), Darian Leader (United Kingdom), Norman Manea (USA/Rumania), Annick Le Scoëzec Masson (France), Jean-Claude Masson (Belgium), Lily Michaelides (Cyprus), Ruth Padel (United Kingdom), Cornelia Parker (United Kingdom), Vicken Parsons (United Kingdom), Alan Riding (United Kingdom), Aníbal Salazar Anglada (Spain), Fernando Savater (Spain), Simon Schama (United Kingdom), Eugene Schoulgin (Norway), Dino Siotis (Greece), Ángela García (Colombia), Lasse Soderberg (Sweden), Ali Smith (United Kingdom), Patrizia Spinato (Italy), Adam Thirlwell (United Kingdom), Luisa Valenzuela (Argentina), Helga von Kügelgen (Germany), Valerio Grutt (Italy), Zinovy Zinik (Russia/United Kingdom), Fred Viebahn (Germany), Frederic Amat (Spain), Neel Mukherjee (United Kingdom), Viktor Wynd (United Kingdom), Devorah Baum (United Kingdom), Josh Appignanesi (United Kingdom), Giuliano Ladolfi (Italy).

SCIENTISTS AND ENVIRONMENTALISTS

Dr. Gary Paul Nabhan (Make Way for Monarchs, University of Arizona), Scott Hoffman Black, (Executive Director, Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Chair, IUCN Butterfly Specialist Group, USA), Sarina Jepson (Director of Endangered Species Program, Xerces Society), Serge Dedina (Executive Director, Wildcoast, USA), Eduardo Najera Hillman (Director, Costasalvaje, Mexico), Tierra Curry (Senior Scientist, Center for Biological Diversity, USA), Scott Slovic (Editor, ISLE Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, USA), Miguel Valencia Mulkay (Ecocomunidades, Mexico), Adriana Matalonga Rodríguez-Beltrán (Red Ecologista Autónoma de la Cuenca de México), Fernando Ortiz Monasterio (Director General, Corpambiental S.C., Mexico), Jonathon Porritt (Founder Director, Forum for the Future, United Kingdom), Tiahoga Ruge, Presidente, Amigos de la Biosfera, AC, México), Garrison Sposito (University of California at Berkeley), Simon Retallack (United Kingdom), Dr. Steven L. Swartz (Director, Laguna San Ignacio Ecosystem Science Program, USA/Mexico), Mary Lou Jones (San Ignacio Ecosystem Science Program, USA/Mexico), Todd Steiner (Executive Director, Turtle Island Restoration Network, USA), Diana Liverman (Institute of the Environment, University of Arizona), Eduardo Farah (EspejoRed, Mexico), Jewell James, Lummi Indian Tribe (USA), Kurt Russo, Executive Director, Native American Land Conservancy (USA), Dr. Alberto Darszón Israel (UNAM, México), Elideth Fernández (Mexico).

Also on WorldPost:

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.