Art Copyright© 2003 Lya Korda
Bonds. The bonds we forge with each other as Mensans, connecting with each other even as we disagree amicably or just share thoughts about the Society to which we all belong, are the strength of Mensa. Those connections are our anchor, our cohesiveness in an otherwise diverse group that celebrates its diversity. Letters to the editor are one means of connecting with each other. Going Forward invites your comments on any issue pertaining to Mensa, including topics that have not been addressed specifically in this newsletter.
About the boilerplate that always precedes "Connections," I'd like to point out that "Letters to the editor are one means of connection with one another" sounds better than what is written. I didn't know the distinction between "each other" and "one another" until I became a Mensa local group editor three years ago, but the rule I've learned is that the former form should be used when only two people are involved, while the latter form is better to use when the group is a larger (or unknown) number. I hope you don't mind my pointing this out. Check out what I say in a grammar book if you don't believe me.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Thank you very much for pointing out the error, Russ. This editor is both embarrassed and enlightened — and the copy has been changed. One of the functions of GF is to improve communication, and you've done that for this editor, and possibly other editors.] [COPY CHECKER'S NOTE: Gee, sharp!]
A comment or two about the September issue.
On page 18, Bennett Woll uses the word "religion" thrice. He makes a very common but significant error. Is it merely a poor choice of words, or does it reflect a conceptual deficiency? His and many others' use of the word "religion" would often be greatly clarified by the use of "church" instead. I have only minuscule arguments about any religion, but volumes to say, mostly invective, about many churches.
On page 21, Sander Rubin writes about "ordering or weighing the various values" and observes that "… A society must also do that in some collective fashion." Well, first of all, Mensa as a society is rightly forbidden to express an opinion on anything. Second, no one has ever been able to get all Mensans to agree on anything. Third, Sander seems to imply that humans are like a hive of bees or a colony of ants that somehow may have a collective mind. There is no collective mind of humans. The closest we come to that is churches, each of which has a leader who cultures it.
I celebrate the fact that Mensa is nothing like a church.
Carl Howes' letter in September's Going Forward regarding membership of the Service Clubs Leadership Conference is riddled with unsubstantiated claims.
Howes originally said that justification for our membership in SCLC was "presented to the members as a networking opportunity about member recruitment and retention." Well, that reason hasn't changed. Conveniently ignoring the financial and other gains already made through our interaction with executives of other non-profit groups, Howes now says that service clubs have "causes" involving service to others, implying that because this isn't what we do, we should withdraw. I truly doubt that either Pam Donahoo or Jean Becker will be infected with a burning desire to shift American Mensa's focus after attending a few meetings with leaders of other non-profit groups, whatever these groups do.
In the May GF, I pointed to Children's Privacy issues, which were discussed at an SCLC conference and which subsequently became the subject of an AMC motion. Because Howes found no reference to the SCLC discussions in the AMC meeting minutes, he claims there is no connection. He also doesn't offer any other source. I stand by my remarks. He quibbles about the fact that I said that four people from Mensa and MERF went to SCLC meetings when, some of the time, he can find only three, as if that's a bad thing. As I understand it, Dr. Mike Jacobson from MERF made up the quartet in previous years.
He quibbles about the $2,521 expense of attending these meetings as not including the "wage expense of sending the national office staff." Wages are paid whether staff attend business conferences or not. American Mensa's office work doesn't lie unattended because some of the staff are at an SCLC conference, any more than it lies unattended when staff get ill or go on vacation.
He also nitpicks that the AMC didn't approve hosting the 2003 SCLC Conference, but that it was announced as part of the AMC Chairman's report. Who cares?
He compares the costs of sending two staff members and one AMC member to an SCLC conference against the bevy of staffers and 21 AMC members that attend AGs for a much longer period. He says that the expense of attending an SCLC conference is "several times that of an AG." His logic escapes me. Significantly, he offers no supporting financial information.
He finds fault with the United Nations' "Year of the Volunteer" program statement, which included an exhortation for "Governments … to promote volunteer activity." This statement, according to Howes, is a political act, of which Mensa should have no part. I hope he doesn't take the same attitude when his Mensa group is looking for volunteers.
He objects to my characterization of Project Inkslinger as "ideological," as if that's a pejorative. He refers to Inkslinger's roots — replacing books in flood-damaged libraries — implying that that's something different from promoting literacy. It isn't.
He claims "the harm to Mensa is documented." What harm, to what part of Mensa, where this documentation is — none of that is explained.
Finally, Howes contends that my comments in May's GF contain misrepresentations and inaccurate statements. In my opinion, that shoe is firmly on his foot.
I read Peg Shambo's article lamenting plans to hold the next several AGs in fun locations. She asks the question "why not choose locations that are not tourist destinations?" while completely overlooking the obvious answer: because they are not tourist destinations. I, for one, like to get as much bang as possible from my travel buck and will be far more likely to attend an AG if the city in which it is held is, itself, a known, favorable destination.
The idea that the national media will swarm all over us if only we choose to meet in a different city is ludicrous. Face it: We're boring. We were boring in Scottsdale and, by contrast, will seem even more boring in locales that are not retirement communities.