Surveying the Damage: Part I

I feel like it may be too soon to survey the damage in the feminist blogosphere, but I’m ready to look [read] and the way bloggers move on [post other topics], quiet themselves [no posting], take a break, or reflect. Things are quiet after the storm. I think we just experienced our own hurricane, one where many damns that held high emotions in check broke, people vanished, blame is thrown around, and the response to rectify the situation fails miserably.

New Orleans, as I have understood the aftermath, still struggles to rebuild what was lost. The aftermath of the whirling forces of destruction revealed deeply embedded racism that was as aged as the blue jazz of Bourbon Street. It’s not like racism began in the Superdome. Racism, in all of its powerful camouflage, systematically works its oppression for years without much commentary. Then, a tragedy occurs and the flimsy responses and reasoning by folks in power, the rage of those who have been wrong, the aftermath publicly displays what has always been there: racism.

The problems didn’t begin with the tragedy or disaster, it was the years and years prior to the final catalyst; the last candle to be lit before everyone could see the same thing in the once dark room. It was the generations of inherited privilege and blindness, the result of prejudicial hand me downs. It was the generations of unaddressed neglect and indifference that builds the oppressed to outrage and frames the privileged for defense, confusion, and denial. This all became evident when structure and order were broken. During times of confusion and instability, responses, choices, and alliances are made. Things become clear when the dust settles.

Emergencies and crisis are excellent for pulling the blanket off other profoundly problematic issues. One thing presents itself alarmingly clear: no one knows or agrees what the hell feminism is or supposed to be anymore. I don’t think this is anything new, I just think it became more pronounced in the past several weeks with high emotion, impulsive postings, and self-revealing blogging. This imploding has only brought to surface all that was rumbling underneath. Like New Orleans, these problems have always been there, long before you or I were here, long before the internet even existed. It was just timing, chemistry, and history that forced the damn to break.

The racism in the women’s movements, in feminism, in feminists is an issue that needs to be actively addressed at all conferences, organizations, discussions, classrooms, kitchen tables, emails, and phone conversations. This is the only way to address it: consistently. Because until that day is reached where radical equality [not sameness] is reached, if we continue to merely pause, build a substitute damn and rebuild our houses [blogs, sites] as if there will not be another crisis in the future, then there is no point to feminism, only a cyclic waste of words.

Read me clearly: there is no point to feminism if it does not actively address its racism with its agenda. There is no point to feminism if it does not address its racist history, racist matriarchy, racist icons, racist literature, racist imagery, racist publications, racist presence. To claim we’re all female and unite under one cause of gender does. not. work. History never lies. This model has left more marginalized women in the road than we can count. Why the dichotomous split between gender and race, as if we live separately from the strands of our hair to the color of skin to the anatomy of genitalia.

This is the space that I demand for my LIFE, for my voice. Let’s abandon “feminist” dialogue momentarily and ask ourselves what we are saying when we request for gender-only analysis of our own lives. For a few it may be called “race neutral[ity],” but for many others, it’s diluting a proud, loving, and undeniable part of their identity and livelihood. There is no separating the left and the right atrium of the heart and expect it to continue functioning. It is one organ, inseparable. That is gender/ace identity. Two connected pieces, one function. It cannot be understood in parts, people must be handled whole. That was the piece that was missing from previous women’s movements and why they are criticized by modern feminists today. We know better. (Usually…sort of.)

If you prioritize gender first and/or only and have built your feminisms on that foundation, fine. I’m not going to spend my time trying to change your mind. But here’s my question – how or why can/do you acknowledge the lives and voices who advocate from their personhood, not just womanhood? How can you sum up one individual’s parts when lives are understood as, encompass, and are influenced by factors other than gender, and those feminisms are founded upon that complexity? How can unity via the gender lens be effective when so many are crying isolation? Contrary to the opinion that acknowledging race separates and divides, it leads to richness. While the process may be viewed as painful and slow and lead to discussions beyond gender, let’s not confuse depth with irrelevance.

If feminists sit at a table we call feminism and there is only so much room for agenda items and topics to discuss, I would say that we are wasting our time in drafting a criteria of what is a feminist issue. In exploring the potentials of feminism’s power, I often think we limit it and ourselves by asking the wrong questions. (What are the wrong questions, you may ask. My answer: the limiting kind.)

The question is not what makes the issue feminist, but has a feminist perspective been applied to the issue? Many perceive the Iraq war not to be a feminist issue. I don’t give two shits if it’s a “feminist issue,” I care if feminists have applied their analytical skills, intelligence, resources, and insight to the Iraq war. The once “not feminist” issue of the war, weapons of mass destruction, torture, and sovereignty transform after a feminist’s examination – seeing the affect of war on womyn and families, womyn fighting in the war, the gendered language of warring countries, rape used as a tactic of war – when we apply a feminist lens, it then BECOMES a feminist issue. How in the hell does it matter at first glance if it’s a feminist issue? If it affects one womyn, anywhere, it can be examined. Who in the world has the right to dictate what is or is not a feminist issue? It might not be to YOU personally, but get off my carpet, it may be a feminist issue after I’m through with it. It’s not about taking a “general” issue and twisting it all around to “make it a feminist issue.” Our progression should not be measured or dictated by what issues we deem acceptable, but by how insightful and truthful our responses are in accordance to ALL womyn’s experience and gender concerns. It’s not about the issue, it’s about the assessment of kyriarchal forces working in the situation and then dismantling it from a feminist perspective.

Further, I don’t believe we need to make it our goal to “feminize” every issue and apply it to our blogs. Each issue must be turned over in our heads before we engage it or disregard it. That’s not a waste of time, that’s called work. Heaven forbid.

My feminism seeks to be a philosophy of life, not for an organization or a mission statement, or a cute bumper sticker. My feminism strives to exist in my breathing. Ironically, I find myself writing about racism more when I am surrounded by feminists or attending a conference or gathering. It’s as if the air is so potent, nothing else can be done until feminists do their own personal anti-racism work. In that vein, yes, it is distracting. It is distracting that we spend an ungodly amount of time feeding lists of how to help (mostly) White women better address their privilege when I’d rather be addressing something else that speaks to other forms of conflict and kyriarchal oppression. But this wins over because, yes, I believe it’s important, and it consumes me with anger when it is not appropriately handled or addressed. I address it because I believe that if feminists themselves do not realize their own destructive patterns of internalized superiority and inferiority, our daughters will receive our to-do list.

My feminism does not seek to prioritize race (or class, or sexuality, or religion, or citizenship, or mobility) over gender, it seeks to acknowledge the equal co/multi-existence of gende/race experiences and honors the space for womyn who have never known the two to be different. My blog, my activism is dedicated to creating a space to examine the endless negotiations of feminism for womyn of difference and to unwaveringly speak with a rigidity in my spine and a compassionate truth in my rocking soul.

My blog has a new direction and grounded purpose. If it were to pick a title for this purpose, I would choose:

Rations for the Journey:
What’s Next After Unpacking the Kyriarchal Knapsack*

*I’m not the hugest fan of this article by Peggy McInstosh, it’s incredibly dated and very “White Privilege” narrow. If you’ve never heard of privilege before and feel a bit lost, start with Peggy and move onto Racialicious for more modern instruction.

Open Stage

So, unless another blogobomb goes off for feminists, I am hoping to move along in my blog. By “move along,” my intentions are to go back to a more healthy level of blogging in terms of both writing and reading. During the past several weeks, I have been more in tune with a comment thread than calling my own parents. I’ve thought more about feminism and oppression than any other facet of my offline life. Not not healthy. For now, I’m not taking a hiatus, but getting back to a more regular posting speed – a well thought out, long post about a specific topic a week and shorter links scattered around it. This is my attempt to practice what I’ve been preaching: tranformation takes time and it takes deep listening. For me, that doesn’t translate into a million posts a week. The transformative practice of writing also takes focus and intentionality.

I would like to open it up for suggestions on what you would like to see on my blog. I’d like to do a free write based off of a question or topic that is not my own. What kinds of questions are left unanswered that can push us forward? What issues got swept under the rug in the room full of shouting? I’m open to suggestions! Give me some questions to ruminate – post them here or email me.

Only one rule: see picture above.

Apparently, Feminists Need Acting Coaches

I work with a lot of theater performance students and they never cease to amaze me with their stories.  Through their dance lessons, movement classes, and technique workshops, they moan and agonize over auditions, call backs, and rejection.

I’m a good 6-7 years older than most of them and I’m often the one mentoring, guiding, and molding them as they prepare to leave college.  Every once in a while, though, they say something to me that knocks me off my rocker.  I was rocked today.
Theater is about absolute understanding of environment.  The balance of actor, timing, and music is critical for a flawless performance.  Actor and actor must be in sync.  Musician and conductor must be in rhythm.  Absolute understanding, nothing less.
One of my favorite students ran into my office today and dramatically collapsed on my couch. Before I even asked what was on her mind, she sat up and shared her wisdom, “Do you know what my acting coach told me today?  She said, ‘Listening means having your life changed.'”
She went on, “It’s true, don’t you see?  When you listen, I mean really listen, you are changing yourself in response to what another person is offering you.  Listening is really about opening your mind to change and the difference of another human being.  Do you know how many times I haven’t listened?  I spend so much time in theater pretending that I am listening, all the while, I am just waiting for MY cue for MY line, MY turn, MY minute to talk.  I realized today:  I don’t listen. ”  She paused.
I paused with her.
Listening means having your life changed.
Are there theater lessons available for feminists?

How Much Do I LOVE This Comment?

Just received this one from the popular Anon:

Anonymous said…
Be sure to thank Jill at Feministe for deleting
all the links to your blog from her comments section. She’s protecting you from
the really bad racists whom only she can handle. You owe her a debt of
gratitude.

Now, let me be clear about a few things:

1) Hi, this is my blog and chose two years ago to make it public to racists and non-racists alike. Therefore, I receive all different kinds of folks stopping in all the time, regardless of who is “protecting” me.

2) “Protection” from Feministe is not something I requested and/or need. That’s what moderation is all about. While I certainly appreciate the gesture to not flood anyone’s blog with unwanted or ill-intentioned readers, you’ve got to be kidding me to write me saying that I am in debt (!) to anyone for protecting me from racism. Check yourself at the comment door, no one is in a position to protect anyone else, especially me, from racist readers. It’s called the reality one assumes as a radical womyn of color blogger.

3)…”whom only she can handle…”  Do you have any idea what you are implying here?

4) Thanks for a good Monday morning laugh.

Accepting Kyriarchy, Not Apologies

In my last post, I actually used the word patriarchy.

[spit]
Ok, now I feel better.  Let me introduce what I really mean when I talk oppression: kyriarchy.
Kyr-whhaaaa?
A few years ago, I studied under a radical feminist theologian Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza who does pretty amazing pioneering week in feminist theology. (Let me say now, if you want to make your head explode with inspiring feminist discourse, dip your toes in feminism and liberation theology…holy schnikes, hold on to your socks.)
Patriarchy, for me, doesn’t cut it.  It cuts it to gender.  As you can see, I’m not that simple. Kyriarchy is a term I adopted four years ago and I feel now it’s time to show my true colors of what I think of patriarchy.  Two words: old skool.
Kyriarchy – a neologism coined by Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza and derived from the Greek words for “lord” or “master” (kyrios) and “to rule or dominate” (archein) which seeks to redefine the analytic category of patriarchy in terms of multiplicative intersecting structures of domination…Kyriarchy is best theorized as a complex pyramidal system of intersecting multiplicative social structures of superordination and subordination, of ruling and oppression. 

PatriarchyLiterally means the rule of the father and is generally understood within feminist discourses in a dualistic sense as asserting the domination of all men over all women in equal terms.  The theoretical adequacy of patriarchy has been challenged because, for instance, black men to not have control over white wo/men and some women (slave/mistresses) have power over subaltern women and men (slaves). 

– Glossary, Wisdom Ways, Orbis Books   New York 2001

Let me break this down for you.  When people talk about patriarchy and then it divulges into a complex conversation about the shifting circles of privilege, power, and domination — they’re talking about kyriarchy.  When you talk about power assertion of a White woman over a Brown man, that’s kyriarchy.  When you talk about a Black man dominating a Brown womyn, that’s kyriarchy.  It’s about the human tendency for everyone trying to take the role of lord/master within a pyramid.  At it best heights, studying kyriarchy displays that it’s more than just rich, white Christian men at the tip top and, personally, they’re not the ones I find most dangerous. There’s a helluva lot more people a few levels down the pyramid who are more interested in keeping their place in the structure than to turning the pyramid upside down.
Who’s at the bottom of the pyramid?  Who do you think are at the bottom of the pyramid who are less likely to scheme and spend extravagant resources to further perpetuate oppression?  I think of poor children with no roads out of hell, the mentally ill who are never “credible,” un-gendered or non-gender identified people, farm workers, modern day slaves…But, the pyramid stratifies itself from top to bottom.   And before you start making a checklist of who is at the top and bottom – here’s my advice: don’t bother.  The pyramid shifts with context.  The point is not to rank.  The point is to learn.
It’s about recognizing the power-over relationships that exist because of property, religion, security, economics, citizenship, and geography.  Let’s not pretend that just because there are not many propertied males mucking around the fem blogosphere, there aren’t queen bees and wanna bees exercising the same kind of behavior.  So when we talk about woman asserting power over other womyn, we’re talking kyriarchy.  When you witness woman trying to dominate, define, outline the “movement” or even what an ally should be – that’s the kyriarchal ethos strong at work. 
So, this is my response to those who have emailed or otherwise asked me what it is I desire.
What I want and what is now the first rule of engagement on my blog is this: Learn Kyriarchy.
If you don’t, then get out of here.  Go drive up the stat counter on someone else’s blog.  
Learn it, think about it, consider it.
Not these apologies or the ones uttered recently are for me to accept or deny.  I tend to view apologies as the beginning, not the end.  So, if apologies are true and heartfelt, you’ll forgive me for not weeping with joy and instead, again, borrowing this popular term, “Prove it.”
Not to me, but to those who you say you love and have hurt.  Prove it to them.
__________________________________________
Thanks to all who have posted or emailed to ask for permission to use the word kyriarchy and give credit to Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza.  I would only encourage you to use her entire name when giving credit, or when using her last name, be sure to write Schussler Fiorenza.  She was ardent with her name and let her students know that we could call her either Elisabeth or Schussler Fiorenza, never Fiorenza alone.  As a womyn with a hyphenated name myself, I can appreciate that one.

Burning Questions

Because I have random thoughts that shoot out of me, I am just going to keep one thread of questions that I update as the questions come.

How in the HELL does a “feminist” press claim “not thinking” when publishing a book about politics and include vulgar images of racism?  
Why do people think I have any idea of what a white feminist should do to unlearn her upbringing?
How do you offer yourself without putting your neck on the chopping board of privilege?
Is there a prescription for being an ally?
Is it just me, or are these latest debacles reminiscent of extended recess in 7th grade (girl’s side of the fence)?
It’s not getting better, is it?
Why is it that when a womyn of color has a complaint, she’s a loudmouth meanie who loves the fleshy attacks at white necks, but when a string of white folks say Hey! it renders apologies and San Francisco diversity trainings? 
Do I really think, after all of that, change is possible?
Or, do I think community building is possible?
More importantly, do I want to?
Who do you build community with?
Who do I trust?
What would Gloria say?
____________________________________________________________________
Updated Lightning Questions and Random Thoughts
What should happen next?
A word on being my ally:
I don’t know how other people identify an ally.  WOC are all different (newsflash) and expectations vary.
Allies aren’t the ones who simply make room for me.  True golden allies are those who can temporarily excuse themselves to not only listen, but apply it into their own LIFE – not career, not social justice theory, not dissertation.  I know I am moving into a better allying space when I realize I am walking next to uncertainty but I trust the walking partner to take me there even though I’m scared as shit to mess up.  
 Being an ally is not as dramatic as people paint it lately.  I mean, how difficult is it to decenter yourself and your own life and absorb someone else’s for a few minutes of your day?  Do you realize it’s not just about you?  It’s not just about YOUR definitions of what is an ally.  DO you know acknowledge the larger systematic boot of violence against womyn of color and the knife of economic violence that shoves womyn of color into corners of poverty, rape, and silence? (I mean, really acknowledge it.)   Being an ally is not ripping the mic from someone else and thrusting it in the face of WOC.   Because, in the end, fast forward 60 years from now, the only person who can answer if you led a life of transformation and solidarity is you.  Why ask me?  
I can share this – Writers and fems and people that I gravitate toward are typically the ones who fight from their life, their life story. One of the more finer lines of division in “feminism” are the womyn who write and fight from their souls and the ones who fight from their head. For me, the clearest indication of an ally is the one who can tell the two apart.  And then can articulate why that division exists in the first place.
And so, with that fundamental difference of online feminism, where DO we go from here?  Wait for another conference, agree to go and see if we can be in one room without killing each other? Have a radical carnival that features not just rwoc or just white fems?  Wait till everything dies down and then move forward when the next explosion occurs?  Blame the patriarchy?  Take a nap?
_________________________________________
Update
Why did I used to say that I was an “anti-racist feminist?”  Shouldn’t have someone told me that I was repeating myself?  Shouldn’t all feminists be anti-racist?  Or should all anti-racists be feminist?  Why do I feel the need to specify and spell that out to people?
If Stanton, Anthony, and even Friedan were reading the feminist blogosphere, would they apologize for their racist comments?  Were they even aware that their agenda was racist?  What is the difference between the agenda of the first “documented” US feminists and the feminist identified womyn today, minus the “waves” description?
If Lorde, Anzaldua, hooks, Smith, Zia were following the fem blogosphere, what would they advise at this point?  Is it better to continue to move forward with clearly different agendas and definitions of feminism and just continue to battle it out each time there is a clear conflict, or do we try and actually agree on a few things and move forward together — is that “together” even truly possible?
Why do I feel more hardened than softened by feminism?  If the point was to  work for equality, then I assume that means that I would learn to better perceive others as equal and work through my own prejudices and obstacles…It’d make sense that that would soften me.  Instead, the roadblocks with the people who are supposedly “feminists” have angered me to the point of being a rigid rock wall rather than a rich ground of soil for grrls to learn from and grow.  What happened there?
_______________________________________________
Update 4/29/08
I just spent an hour reading posts about being an ally and I found it interesting how many good hearted folks are writing about their desire to listen to womyn of color.  A question popped into my mind.  Do folks realize that I am working through my own crap as well?  I mean, aren’t we all?  Isn’t that the point of…you know, life?  To reach 28 and realize you must unlearn 27 years to truly move forward?  Allies keep insinuating and emphasizing that womyn of color have the answers.  Well, let me speak for myself:  I don’t have the answers.  I just raise damn good questions.

It Was Never About One Thing, You Realize

There are a few things I rarely do on my blog.  First, I rarely link to large blogs or mainstream sites.  Second, I rarely name anyone on my blog.  I think I’m about to depart from that.  At least for this post.

It was never about one incident, or one blogger, or one site, or one problem.

It was never just about how it was all white folks who got to throw back at a bloggers’ lunch with Bill Clinton.
It was never just about Burquagate.
It was never just about the racism spewed at Nubian in comment threads at Feministing.
It was never just about the cover of Full Frontal Feminism.
Or the cover of It’s a Jungle Out There.
It was never just about the aftermath of Katrina.
Surprise, it’s not even about Gloria Steinem’s pathetic New York Times article that called gender over race.
This was well before WAM! was bedazzled with unflattering reviews.
Or when Seal Press went off its rocker.
This was even before the Margaret Sanger’s comments of racism, sexism, and disgrace.
It was never just about Jena 6.
It was never just about Megan Williams.
This was before Sylvia was a Problem Chylde.
This was before discussions of appropriation and credit.
This was never just about a revised proposal for Yes Means Yes.
It was never about one blogger.  Not BFP, BA, or any one singular voice.
There never was a whole lot for me to say about these events.  Somewhere inside, I wonder if I have become that Adult I most feared: the one who’s seen too much to hope.  I’ve got a list down my arm of what I wanted to write about: allies, racism, imagery, technology and accountability, invisibility vs. invincibility, and privilege
and then the list got too long and I suddenly
felt
tired.

A Question of Feminism or a "Movement?"

Most of the following is based from a long phone call with BFP who asked the heaviest of questions, 

“Is There a Movement?”

For a long time, I have quoted warrior Helen Zia who said, “There is not a women’s movement, capital W, capital M.  There are women’s movements, plural.”
In an interview with Ms. Magazine, she states:

Feminism is not a racist ideology. If someone claims to be a feminist but exhibits exclusionary behavior and is reluctant to change–we all have prejudices, so I’m not holding feminists to a higher level–I expect them to change. What I say to women of color and other young feminists or womanists is this: there is no Women’s Movement, capital W, capital M. There are women’s movements, plural. And those movements are alive and well in communities of color. Many of the strongest voices in our communities of color are women. We carry our communities on our backs. With or without the label, we’re there. To say that women of color are not interested in equality for women is just not true.
But many women of color have had negative experiences with individual, white, so-called feminists or with organizations and institutions within a feminist framework. I’ve had negative experiences. But we accomplish much more together than separately. I don’t throw out the notion of feminism because of the negatives. We all have to work on these negatives. We cannot sum up a movement based on individual experiences.

I’ve been thinking about feminism, its “movement,” and recent events of the past several weeks. 
I believe there is feminism.  I don’t believe there is a movement.  US Feminism was born out of suffragists who wanted the right to vote.  Was it an inspiring and worthy historical event?  Of course.  Was it grossly racist and ignored the needs and rights of womyn of color?  Of course.  But, nonetheless, it was deemed and documented as a movement.  It was a movement that stirred the 70s and 80s with new language and terms to describe sexual harassment, patriarchy, and equality in the workplace.  Were these important events that took place? Of course.  Was it, once again, infuriatingly ignorant of the works and voices of womyn of color? 
Did the US women’s “movement” break the backs and hearts of marginalized womyn?
Yes.
Does it continue to do so?
YES.
But it is being deemed and documented as a movement.
So, here I am, a Brown womyn, born and raised in the US declaring from my seat in this arena that there is no movement for me.  If I had been born in the roaring 20s or grew into adulthood during the 2nd wave, as a Brown womyn, I would still be saying the same thing: There is no movement for me.
What is the “movement?”  Where is the movement?  Is it a constellation of values and agenda?  As inspiring as it is to think as bell hooks, “feminism is for everyone,” what happens when “everyone” receives an invitation to the situation room?  What happens on a very human level of conferences, conversations, blogging, and community formation when the movement shows no clear mission, no consistency, organization, or clarity?  Such celebrated ambiguity leaves perfect target practice holes for lethal mistakes, a slip of the knife, expensive missteps.
I used to argue that feminism is the movement that embraces the human development of each individual and each person could find an empowering home in the scaffolds of feminism, but now I’m not so sure when it seems like more and more womyn of color are either being elbowed off the scaffold or willingly jumping off to walk on solid ground.  When I think of past social movements there was a distinct, tangible understanding among its walkers. There was some agreement of accountability to keep people in check.  If a non-violence group member pulled a gun, she’s no longer non-violent.  However, if a feminist is racist or classist, “Oh, s/he’s trying…”
There is feminism yes, but how that transpires in the action of each “feminist” ultimately defines the movement as a whole.  For US feminists, the access to feminism opens most easily for privileged womyn whose minds and lives have been formatted to privileges of comfort, entitlement, and therefore ignorance.  The “movement,” of feminism is drowning in a pathology of privilege, a forgetfulness of its use and potential, a permanent amnesia of truly liberating the oppressed.  By simple biology, feminism will take a different face in womyn because of race and privilege.  It’s as if our priorities are completely different.  These days, I feel like we don’t even speak the same language and we are hurt by completely different things. 
The question of liberation for privileged feminists will always remain unanswered because they are not equipped, they never learned to self-analyze beyond their own profit and gains. Privileged feminists will remain, I believe, fumbling in the dark with nothing but their oversized dry hands, their desire to be a good ally but inability to acutely challenge their darkest shadows of moral responsibility and fragile egos.   In the meantime, the backs of womyn of color have been broken.
This division in feminism breathes in my generation, my feminism.  It has filled me with an anger I cannot explain, a frustration beyond my reach.  Each day my anger is different and I can’t say it in more simple terms than this: I expect more.
And so, if I am a feminist, like Zia, I will expect those who do not confront racism and issues of marginalization to change.  I expect better.  Feminism – the social, political, and economic belief that womyn are equal – still has me pinching its fanny.  Cross my name off the “movement” though.
Observing the feminist blogosphere in the aftermath of (W)AM AND A SEAL is enough evidence that history will continue to deem and document these times as a “movement,”  
even though it has…well, you know the rest.
  

Spring Time



Don’t you just adore spring?

Aside from my wheezing lungs from springtime allergens and the increased number of tourists in the city, I tell you, there is nothing like spring.

Today, the Boston Marathon cancelled all classes around the city and Nick and watched about 25,000 folks run their fannies off. We were at the finish line and stood for an hour, squished, shoulder to shoulder with screaming strangers who were ringing mini cowbells in our ears.

Pretty awesome and inspiring to watch.

More importantly, Congrats to Staci Condon! Nick and I are so pumped for you and Josh!