As they say, in the end it’s like the blink of an eye.
It’s done and I’m feeling good about it. 500 fliers, I stuck to my resolution and engaged with nearly 400 people, actually more, I’m not counting declines.
Though I kept them to a minimum since I was targeting a specific audience, young, intelligent, serious looking like they were here for business. Of course, scientific method loving people was there in my introduction and that sorted 'em out in a hurry, with over three thousand people I wasn't planning on wasting copies, or time, I was looking for the chorus and pretty much found them. ;-) .
Walking around scanning the crowd, you could say profiling. In fact, I did say it, it was a good ice breaker. Not that everyone was chronologically young, many were rather flattered to hear they made my liberal cut, exuding youthful vibes goes a long ways. ;- )
Dare say I swept up a number self identified scientists, cool people, love the hard eye, yet willing ear, then some nice discussions. Experiences like those lets me know that I'm not totally bonkers and that I best keep doing whatever it is I'm doing. (Guess that's what 'bliss' - of the Joseph Campbell variety - is all about, no other options if one's going to be honest with oneself.)
I had a basic pitch thought out and it held up fairly well through a couple hundred variations. I was reassured at how many people engaged my intro question with stories and outlooks of their own, before returning back to the flier I was holding in my hand.
Would like to write about it sometime, but not tonight (nor this morning, I'm going home.)
There is this last item, ironically in light of various discussions centered on evangelical amorality, hypocrisy and their blind-sidedness, after returning to my room, Dartagnan at Kos pointed me to this timely, illuminating opinion piece.
I never thought about evangelical patriarchy quite this way. Hessinger and Tobey wrote a column that's like a good hypothesis - it clears up a lot riddles. As for my title, today at the Convention I saw the hope, the following describes the problem. I’m quoting the first few paragraphs to get your interest, please read the full column, bet you'll find it time well spent.
By Guest Columnist/cleveland.com | Posted Apr 11, 2018
Rodney Hessinger is a history professor at John Carroll University. Kristen Tobey is an assistant professor of religion and the social sciences at John Carroll University.
CLEVELAND HEIGHTS, Ohio -- The most recent Pew polls suggest that President Donald Trump hasn't just held his support amongst white evangelicals but actually has grown his support since the Stormy Daniels story took hold.
With his white evangelical support having dropped to 61 percent in December, Trump now enjoys 78 percent support, just a shade beneath the support he won from white evangelicals on Election Day. …
In fact, there are good reasons why we should expect this result. The history and sexual politics of evangelicalism in America fit well with Donald Trump and his message.
White evangelicals, particularly in the South, long ago lined up their party with "family values," which above all else has meant patriarchy.
As historian Christine Heyrman displayed in her classic book "Southern Cross," the authoritarian dynamic was central to Southern antebellum families. To win Southern hearts, evangelicals buttressed patriarchy, empowering fathers and looking the other way when they took prerogatives which crossed moral lines. …
But despite this early and enduring success, evangelicals still often see themselves as embattled outsiders. As sociologists of religion have observed, religious outsiders have much to gain from boundary maintenance, often courting outcast status or even persecution to rally the faithful. …