It’s all about the context.

One of the things I see running around the internet, especially Tumblr, is a set of pictures from “Orange Is the New Black”. It is the scene in which Piper gives a mini-rant to Pennsatucky about how she doesn’t believe we get cancer to learn life lessons, kids don’t die because more angels are needed—that whole thing. When I see the photoset, captioned especially with the cancer quote, on Tumblr, often the post is reblogged with a “yes” kind of fist pump note. I know those posting it are agreeing with that cancer doesn’t give life lessons bit, and I do too.

But I do not reblog it, even though I want to, because the photoset is taken out of context.

Like most people, I binge-watched both seasons of OITNB, so I have no idea what events happen in which episode, and my timeline memory of the tiny details is a little off. But I do know that after this scene occurs, one character tells Piper she is not a nice person; that she is, in fact, mean. That scene stands out, but I think there are a few other scenes that imply the same thing—that Piper is regarded by the other prisoners as less than an upstanding, good prison (or elsewhere) citizen. True for me, Piper is not the most likeable one on the show.

I’m not going to get into an analysis of the show—the issues of privilege, and the high school level irony that this main character in prison with so-called worse criminals is not considered a “good” person. I’m not a TV/film critic. But I do find it interesting that this piece of entertainment/art chooses this less sympathetic character to give the “no life lessons” speech.

Yeah, yeah, it’s just a “stupid” TV show. As someone pointed out to me the other day, it is silly so much chatter is going on about the Oscar® snubs of POC/women, of “Selma”, when so many world atrocities are not getting news coverage or social media chatter. On the surface that’s true. But dig deeper. Those silly awards snubs reflect a deeper problem in American society. I have always been of the opinion that TV/film/music reflect society’s ills, and it is easy to dismiss “silly entertainment issues” when we don’t want to confront the not so silly issues brought up by entertainment/art. (To be clear, I don’t think OITNB is “stupid” hence the quotes; actually I love it. I use the quotes to indicate that some people would dismiss it as such.) Storytelling, whether it be through poetry/rap, books, films, and yes, even blogs, is how we make sense of the world.

So Piper, the mean person, the person other prisoners do NOT think of as a “good” person, doesn’t think we get cancer to learn life lessons. I agreed with her whole speech in that scene, even though I too, do not think she is a good person, and heck, watch the show mostly because of the other characters. Ugh, what does THAT mean? BTW, I’m not just now thinking about all this, I contemplated it last summer when I binge-watched the show, but I am pushed to write this after seeing the photo set pop up on my dash for the millionth time the other day.

Well, as usual, I cannot even answer my own questions—I’m just throwing them out there, like I often do.

How I interpret this OITNB treatment of Piper is that this is the way society in general regards someone who would say “we don’t get cancer to learn lessons”. Others recoil from that person, and consider them “mean”. True, it is other deeds or words that contribute to the meanness, but the no life lessons point of view seems to be in keeping with the overall character type. Whether the story writers are doing this to point out that society does this, or because they truly agree with the other characters and are using them to articulate their view that people like Piper are “mean”, I do not know, or care very much.

Here in CancerLand, we KNOW that there is no one right way to “do” cancer, that we are allowed to feel and think as we will. But the sad fact is that it is hard to go against the socially accepted single story. The dancing mastectomy woman, and the woman who threw a goodbye party for her breasts, will always be lauded and rewarded for their so-called positive attitudes and actions. Anyone who expresses sadness, fear, anger, etc.—well, we won’t be punished exactly, but getting called “mean”, or asked why we do not choose to be positive, that is the most common outcome (oh man, the concept of choice in beliefs and feelings is a whole can of worms for a post). We can spout “there is no one right way to do anything” quotes all day (and I do, all over my blog and Facebook), but maybe society in general has not yet attained our level of understanding. (That does NOT mean we should not keep trying to blog our way to understanding, however.) So when social media crowns a new she-ro and points to her celebrations as a THE way to do cancer, well, it creates another hard-to-achieve standard that I am not interested in pursuing—but will have to put up with ignorant folks looking at me like I should at least try. The idea that women with breast cancer must put on the happy face and not let anyone see the pain and fear is again perpetuated. And in televised fictions, the no life lessons woman will be considered mean.

As it may be clear, or rather, unclear, I’m thinking about a hundred million things again, and better end this post before it becomes another unwieldy ramble. Hopefully, I get time to write about the issues bothering me so, that I’ve hinted at here today.

Until then…

When I re-post old posts, I feel like I’m giving out stale pieces of bread. But, I mostly feel the same way about the subject as when I wrote it–so does that make the post still “fresh”? Has it not passed the sell-by date? OK, enough food analogies (I like to cook and eat, so sue me).

Anyway there are usually multiple reasons I re-post. I read other blogs or articles that cause me to think, then I realize, I’ve covered this before. I might again. But for now, the re-post will have to do.

The Age Divisions

Posted on January 8, 2013 by Cancer Curmudgeon

One Reason: LOTS of chatter on the interwebz about positivity lately. Advice that cancer patients should “be positive”. And I’m seeing a very disturbing lack of understanding for those who are labeled “negative” (although I do NOT label myself that way). My new favorite quote applies here: “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.” – Nietzsche

Another Reason: I’ve been really, really, REALLY busy—too busy to write. I sit down each day and skim stuff to read and then fall asleep before I can get started. Hope to change that next week.

I’m Allowed

Posted on July 29, 2013 by Cancer Curmudgeon

A very special thanks to Tumblr buddy lux-fiam, who guided me as I struggled with this post, and to my IRL spoonie/fake psychiatrist/professor friend, with whom I fight The Overwhelming.  

For the people who say “thanks for this.”

This post is about allowing myself and encouraging others to do cancer any way we damn well please.

Just prior to starting this blog, and in the hazy days of bouncing back from the treatment side effects, I was in a bit of a depression. As I’ve mentioned in previous posts, I had no time or energy to find blogs while I was actively in treatment and working my ass off. During treatment I was not happy with the rah-rah/pink/warrior culture that was the most prevalent form of support available (except in the diagnosed-under-40 support group, thank goodness). After I made some life changes, I was pleased to finally be able to take some time and dig around and find blogs or articles that said some of the thoughts that were more like mine, and I began blogging to interact a bit.

Around the same time I found other blogs, I had an epiphany. I was at some event last autumn with other cancer patients and expressing some anger. A fellow attendee started suggesting stress reduction methods, telling me that I must “accept” my cancer and ended her pseudo-lecture with “you can’t be angry all the time.” I was just so sick of this type of lecture; it wasn’t the first time I’d heard words of that nature. And BTW, I don’t think people mean the dictionary definition of “accept” when they tell me to do that; I think they really mean “shut up and sit down”.

There I was, a 40-year-old woman, being talked down to like a 6-year-old, because, being, ahem, a couple decades younger than most in the room, I was the youngster, the newbie; never mind I’d finished treatment already. I was not a cancer expert (and still am not), but I wasn’t a novice either, for crying out loud.

Then it hit me—why was I even listening? I can be angry if I want! I probably thought those sentences in the petulant voice of the 6-year-old me, but the minute I did, half the anger just fell away. And it continues to fall away still. By giving myself permission to be angry, sad, frustrated, etc., I become less so, especially with each post I write. Sure, anger & other bad company are still there, but in a weakened and more useful way–they inspire and motivate me, to speak up or write these posts. Whether they should be posted and sent into the blogosphere—I’ll get to that in a minute.

While I get that people who say “think positive/cheer up” and that sort of thing are well-intentioned, maybe even trying to help—the result for me is the opposite. I just get more pissed off, because in my mind, my feelings are being diminished, dismissed, blown off. That never feels good. Cancer sucks, but being told how to do cancer sucks too. Part of the crapfest that is cancer is the culture around it (especially true in breast cancer), and the culture demands conformity, and as I’ve said in previous posts, I cannot do conformity. It is great that the normal, socially acceptable warrior/pink/rah-rah methods work for the majority of folks, I can respect that. I’ve seen people swallow negativity and wondered if they could achieve better peace by letting it out, but it is not my place to tell them what to do. And I don’t want to be told what to do/how to handle cancer either.

This blog is to escape and to challenge all of the bullshit in the warrior cancer/don’t worry, be happy world that just does not ring true for me. Here, I express my thoughts in my way, no matter if they are angry, or blunt, or whatever other unpleasant adjectives can be applied to them. Here, I express my experiences of cancer without (much) self-censorship. My professional life before 2012 was very constricting, so I wanted a space where the rules, limits, deadlines, ideas were mine alone. This is that space.

I think many would tell me I should keep my ugly thoughts to myself; I should stop sending negativity out into the universe, or blogosphere. But my challenge to that attitude is this: why is expressing negative feelings automatically considered a negative action—why can it not be viewed as a positive, “working through it” technique, which is kind of the point of a lot of therapy? How can bad feelings be turned around if not confronted, if they are constantly submerged, denied, hidden politely away? And most of all, why is it assumed that expressing negativity means the one expressing it is negative on the whole, and somehow not capable of experiencing other emotions (sometimes simultaneously)?

My blogs are not read by many, but the few comments I’ve gotten here or on the other blog tend to say “thanks”, and some variation of “I thought I was the only one who felt that/this is what I’ve been trying to say.” So while many hear/read thoughts that make them uncomfortable (which might be behind some of the “get happy” suggestions rather than a desire to really help), those same thoughts provide comfort to a few. I remember all too well last October not knowing what search terms to use to find people with opinions similar to mine, and I remember all too well how relieved I was to stumble, bass-ackwards, onto blogs that did express such opinions. So if my blog is just one more place someone can stumble upon and find relief, then my own victory over anger & company is nearly complete. I hope your victory can be found here too.

I keep hearing some TV commercial using the Sid Vicious version of the song. Most folks prefer Sinatra’s classic interpretation, I’m sure. Some may hate the song altogether, no matter who sings it, and some may never have heard it. Such is the story around interpretations of songs. I’ll argue until I’m blue in the face that only Bing should sing “White Christmas”, I gag when I hear Clapton’s “I Shot the Sheriff” because I only like Marley’s, and Jeff Buckley’s “Hallelujah” is THE definitive version, and I violently turn off the radio if I hear Rufus Wainwright’s take on it (of course, since Cohen wrote it, I do listen to his versions, consisting of whatever selection of the many verses to the song).

The point of these musical musings is that everyone has their own point of view about how a song should be sung, and how cancer should be treated. While I can create my own playlist with my preferred versions, I would never insist on forcing my playlist on others, and I certainly do not suggest anyone do what I did with cancer—in terms of medical treatment choices, attitude, ANYTHING! But as anyone with cancer knows, it is damn near impossible to avoid anyone telling us how to do cancer.

Several days ago*, there was some small ripple on Twitter because a person told Lisa Adams to enjoy the time she has left—and stop fighting, what is it with people saying that?! The essence was, stop treating, accept that we all must die—that tired old message. Geez, not even a year after the Kellers decided Adams was not doing cancer to their liking—WTF!

At first I thought this person did not have cancer, and was just mouthing off. My gut reaction, to anyone who spews that “we all gotta go sometime and it is your turn now” crap is: hey, unless you are the one doing the dying, you have NO right to say that. We all gotta go sometime? OK, be my guest, I prefer to stay alive. And I still have that view—I’ve seen enough of that kind of sentiment expressed prior to this to be quite set about my view. (No, I do not have stage 4 cancer, and I do NOT have an opinion about how it should be handled, not even for myself—I learned during cancer that it is not possible to know what I’ll do in a situation unless I’m in it, will cross that bridge when I get to it).

After reading a few of the tweets tho’, I am guessing this person is also stage 4 and has decided to stop treating. That’s fine—for him or her, but not Adams or anyone else.

Cancer is a human issue, one that all humans must consider and discuss. The fact that money and time is spent on research for treatments that might benefit millions is a matter for public discourse. But there is a fine line crossed when one person tells another how to handle the same stage and/or type of cancer. I’ve said many times, cancer does not exist in a vacuum—two people may have very similar types of cancer, but there are too many other factors, medical and otherwise, that mean comparison is just off-limits. Sure, advice is fine, but the ultimate choice must remain with the individual. And just because any individual shares their story of choices on social media, it is NOT an invitation for criticism or questioning, or especially permission to “stop fighting”. (I’ve posted about the issue of whether sharing a cancer story invites public opinion before, here and here, and will likely do so again.)

My various playlists would likely give most folks a headache, switching from Morrissey to the Misfits to Metallica in moments. So I would not force them on anyone, hell I don’t even share them. Who cares? They’re mine. Same with cancer. The treatment path I took worked well for me, as did my post-surgery choices. Some may take the “way” of Ol’ Blue Eyes, and I’ll side with Sid’s “way”.

My Way. Your Way. The only WAY to do cancer, is the patient’s way.

*Several days ago—what can I say? I’ve been busy. So my posts about things are gonna be late. I write a post in my head when things happen, and hope I can get around to writing, but usually I don’t. I hope to write about many items—the Dr. Smith blog for one, but I can’t promise anything.