He Has the Hate NOT the Strength

…Allow yourself to hate Trump winning the election, then do something about it.


(To be fair I am sure there are some nice KKK members)

If anyone, in all seriousness, needs to talk about the election please reach out to me.

Ae Padilla

After he won Ohio, I knew it was over. Hope is great and everything, but when CNN anchors look more and more nervous as the election night comes to a close, it’s time to let the crying commence. And it did, along with the drinking and cursing. Donald Trump is the president – elect of the United States and yes of course I am upset about this.

I have in multiple conversations, never held back my distain for Trump. From the way he has belittled handicap people, minorities and LGBT people, to the way he has bragged about his own sexual assaults of women, as well as that small little promise to ban Muslims from our country…he disgusts me in every which way. He’s a narcissist. A liar. A sexual predator. A bully. A borderline sociopath. And soon to be leader of one of the most influential countries on Earth.

So I cried in anger on Tuesday night well into Wednesday morning. I cried because I couldn’t yell. I cried because at the time I could not protest. There was not one person in particular I could send a nasty text to, I had to hate half of the American public – or half of the half that voted.

The next morning I had to hate everyone who made jokes about him being elected. I had to be okay with racists and sexists claiming their part in my country as a majority and not a minority. I had to deal with the fact that even a few hundred people voted for a dead gorilla, Harambe, as the leader of America. I’m sorry but that’s not funny. Memes are funny. Knowing that “educated” adults went out to polls and made a mockery of their vote is fucking infuriating. These people aren’t writing in “Bernie Sanders,” these people are a shooting a middle finger at democracy for the chance of a good Twitter post.

So am I angry? Of course I am angry. I am angry at anyone who isn’t angry. I am rationally angry at people (including even friends who I am very close to) who choose not to be political because it may seem “annoying to followers and threatening to their likes.” I am angry at some white entitled men, republicans and democrats alike who look the other way because they know that those comments that Trump said weren’t directed at them, but they were directed at people they love. I am angry that women are nervous about wearing their Hijabs in public. I am angry that some Americans will lose their healthcare and as a result their lives. I am angry that my niece and possibly maybe even one day my daughter will live in a country where a reality star misfit can say ‘I grab women by the pussy’ and be the 45th President of the US. I am angry that experience counts for nothing. That you don’t have to play by the rules. Hell, you don’t even have to know what the rules are.

Am I worried about foreign affairs, the fact that Trump has Putin on speed dial? All the meetings to take place in the Oval? Of course yes, also. But this is a family matter. This stays close right now. I carry it in my heart; I don’t have the luxury to carry it anywhere else. Because guess what? I am also scared.

What does this mean for the rights of me as a Hispanic woman in this country? But also what does it mean to everyone else…that family I spoke of, who do not look like the first 43 presidents, who walk with purpose for a better tomorrow promised to them these past eight years but who now are terrified of where they go from here. Who feel like a path of comfort suddenly disappeared from under their feet. Excuse me if foreign policy is not on the forefront of my mind. I am trying to hug my family.

So the past few days I’ve mourned. Death of someone close to me type of mourn. And I have been lucky enough to be able to do that in a place that is safe. In my room and at my work, an environment with women and men who understand, who hugged me when I walked in on Wednesday and started crying with me too.

And we’re not all Hillary supporters to the core. Not even democrats. It’s just that we don’t support hate.

In the past three days and in the next weeks, months, years we will hear people telling us how to react to the news of Trump as our president. Stop being dramatic. Get over it. And my personal favorite: let’s all just love each other.

Be careful of people saying this. I know that most of it comes from a good place. But I know some of it unfortunately comes from people who don’t understand what it’s like to live in a country that hasn’t always loved them. Who don’t have to be as angry. Who don’t have to understand our pain. Who don’t know what it’s like to see the country you love fall apart on top of the people who were oppressed in building it. It’s not part of their ancestry.

What I would give to not care as they do. To be so oblivious. To follow a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

And so I’ve reached the point where it has become socially unacceptable to stay in bed and cry over an orange faced cheeto in the White House come January. I have to get up and do things. I have to, as I have done before, stay angry. We have to stay angry at those who voted for him, at him, and even at us.

We have to channel that anger into some damn work, knowing that voting, in particular for me, was not enough. The change comes from small work first and foremost. Phone calls. Canvassing. Volunteering. Donating. It sucks that there is no other way around it right now and that big influential change looks a lot like 2018 but in a way it is also unbelievably a good thing. Complacency feeds itself. And we have done enough of that the past year as democrats, young people, and progressives.

Trump won because Trump lured in the uneducated, the weak, the bigots, but the voters. The type of men who don’t let their sons play with dolls. The type of women who think catcalling is a compliment. The type of people who say they believe in the work of Jesus but hold onto their money a little too tightly. Who condemn transgender people. Who say minorities are lazy. Who roll their eyes when they see a Black Lives Matter sign. Who joke about Mexicans hopping the wall. Who don’t use the term “Mexicans.” Who call me a wetback. Who casually rape women. Who casually rape me.

Despise them but change them. Despise them but don’t hurt them. Despise them and get motivated. Do not become the enemy. And allow yourself, as I have, to hate a man who has never respected you. See I got taught to respect your elders and authority as a kid, but I am not buying it. I say respect anyone who respects you in return. Trump, the president – elect but not MY president – elect has never respected me. I am merely a piece of ass to him. His words not mine. So no, I do not support or respect him.

What happens when you blindly respect a leader looks a lot like 1940’s Germany.

I know the Hitler comparisons have been there before, and now I am sure they are here to stay. But listen when I say this. Because I’ve gone back and forth on something and I think I now understand.

Trump has the hate, but he does not have the strength.

He will love the power. Get off on it. He will appoint people to his cabinet which will make us all want to run for the hills (or in this case Canada.) He will continue to be disrespectful. He will continue to elicit people to feel like their xenophobia is acceptable. But he will get bored. He will crack. He will stumble across the floors of better people who came before him because he was never taught to properly walk with grace. And when he does fall, and he will, it will be up to us to rise up and help blind followers and take back a nation that is accepting of all people who do not go out with the intention to physically, emotionally, or mentally hurt other human beings.

I’ve been seeing a lot of amazing hopeful posts following the election about the genuine love and kindness being displayed in the midst of the country’s shell-shocked demeanor. I’ve heard a lot of opinions particularly regarding the fact that we are the only ones who can make sure that this power imbalance never happens again.

The people saying this are right. Let’s stop looking around waiting for someone else to stand up. Let’s stop twiddling our thumbs. Let’s stop squinting our eyes for the white knight on a horse to make his appearance. “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.”

But we have to take care of ourselves first. We have to do us. And then we have to do a lot more. And we will get him out of the White House. And we will get love back. And we will fight with words not guns. And we will wear safety pins. And we will march. And we will be okay.


It Took Me Years to Realize My Ex-boyfriend Sexually Assaulted Me


(This photo was taken during my senior year of college at The University of Texas at Austin)

This blog, oh boy where do I start? I should first state TRIGGER WARNING for discussions of rape, sexual assault, and shitty humans. The following peice was written in 2014 and edited (only slightly) for a national magazine and online website earlier in 2016. After finally finding the strength to not only write but approve publication of this article, I received word from my editors that while they wanted to go through with officially putting the peice into print they could not. Unless I was to write under a pseudonym or find a way to make my ex boyfriend not as recognizable in my description of him, they would not be allowed to run the article because the person I spoke about has never been charged or found guilty in a court of law in the United States. It could be slander. And he could press charges on me for my claim of rape. I was upset, sad, and perplexed. It’s taken me years to feel like this secret is not my fault. And I don’t care. If I never pressed charges on him, then he can’t on me. More importantly, I hope this can help someone.

Ae Padilla

I had heard it more than enough times. 1 in 3 women will get sexually assaulted.

I knew the statistics – what to look out for, how alcohol contributes to men taking advantage of women, that assaults often happen at the hands of someone the woman might know, and that being in college I was prone to more violence.

So I took protecting myself into my own hands. I put my keys through my fingers when I found myself walking alone late at night. I tried to lessen the times I would go over to a random guy’s apartment. I never picked up a drink I didn’t make myself. I did this all to prevent myself from being the victim of my own personal crime show.

But I was never concerned about my boyfriend.

Not him. Oh no. He was wonderful. He was the one who I went to when I was having a bad day. He was the one who kissed me, listened to me, and took me on spontaneous trips for the weekend. Sure, he had his problems, probably more than I would care to admit, but he was never going to do anything to me. And if he was it was going to be breaking my heart, not sexually assaulting me.

My boyfriend (we will call him Shawn), during my junior year of college, knew I was still a virgin at twenty-one. Despite a previous relationship and random night hook-ups there was always a part of me that held onto the idea of waiting until marriage to have sex. Sure it was old-school, but I liked the idea of it. It wasn’t about religion. To me it was about having the comfort and acceptance of one person that I could grow sexually with indefinitely. But like many people, I let that decision go. I was in love and one thing led to another and somehow I found myself lying underneath him one night after he made me dinner having sex.

It’s not that I didn’t want to do it, it’s just that I didn’t want to do it right then and there. Still, I really didn’t go out of my way to stop it before it happened. Don’t ask me why I didn’t because I ask myself that all the time. And really there aren’t many concrete answers. None the less, around ten seconds into the act, when I felt him push further, I did tell him to stop. He could sense my uncomfortableness, and mistaking it for me being hurt immediately got off me and asked if I was ok. After a beat I said “I’m fine, I just don’t trust you.”

Call it women’s intuition, call it whatever you like, but it was the truth. I didn’t trust him and as a result something was telling me to stop having sex with him. If you think that he tried to force himself back on me you are wrong. He was actually as a nice as anyone can be in a moment like that. He said I did not have to do anything I did not want to. He went and grabbed me a glass of water and then we watched sports in bed together. And over some awkwardness, a lot of it, I told him that I did not want to have sex again until it was the right time for him and I, and that I would tell him when that would be. I told him that despite me being on the pill he would need to wear a condom next time. I told him that while he was very experienced and used to this, I was not. I also told him I wanted to feel like we had more of a connection despite how in love we were with each other. He said he completely understood. He would wait for me.

Two days later he assaulted me.

I had gone out downtown with my friends that weekend and was at least six to seven drinks in. He had gone out on a “guy’s night” and said that he would pick me up from the bar and take us back to my apartment. By the time I got into his car sometime around 2:30 in the morning I was pretty wasted.

I remember bits and pieces of the rest of that night. I remember him parking, me stumbling as he caught me, slapping my butt playfully as we snacked on whatever leftovers I had in my fridge. I remember me making out with him. And then suddenly I remember me staring down at him, me muttering “what are you doing? Stop real quick.” and him just repeating “God this feels so good. This feels good.” I remember moving up and down and feeling a little dizzy. And yes it felt good but also wrong at the same time. Scary. He was controlling everything – and not in a hot exciting way. When I got off of him, after he got off, I went to my living room and cried openly on the couch.

He then proceeded to walk up to me, boxers back on, and say “I am not going to keep having sex with you if you keep crying when I have sex with you Alyssa. It’s not fair to me.”

Looking back on this I cringe thinking about his words. But at the state I was in that night I wasn’t ready to put up a verbal fight. I was a vulnerable mess. I caught myself saying sorry to him and we went to bed. Just like that, I let it all go.

I’ve been able to think a good amount about that night in the roughly three and a half years since it has happened because I come back often to that week. Three days after he took advantage of me while I was drunk I found out that he had been cheating on me for months with a secret girlfriend from his hometown and various other girls for one-night-stands in between the two of us.

There aren’t good words for what happens when you find out something like that. I was pissed. I was heartbroken. I was even unnaturally apathetic. And the rest of the story goes like this: I broke up with him and told him to never speak to me again. I called him a sociopath, a cheater, and a “virginity stealer.”

His response? “Don’t act like I raped you,” he said with that ridiculous half smirk, half fleeting anger on his annoyingly attractive face.

I wasn’t worried about another insensitive comment from him. I was too busy taking care of my other problems. I was too busy scheduling STD tests, going to summer school, and distracting myself from keying his Jeep.

It was not until a year later that I realized I should have said to him in that moment “but you did rape me.”

He did technically rape me.

I know that people will think that I am trying to pawn something on someone who did me wrong. That is not how it is at all. I am in no way seeking revenge on him because of him cheating on me. That is in the past and something else entirely to get over.

This declaration of his sexual assault is to remind people, maybe even to remind myself, that the line between consent is often unnecessarily blurry. Sometimes that just happens with two equally drunk people. But most of the times, someone, even someone in a relationship, finds themselves getting assaulted.

Shawn knew I didn’t want to have sex that night. Shawn knew I didn’t want to have sex again without a condom. He did it with me anyway unprotected. He knew I was drunk. And even though, looking back, I am sure he was driving buzzed, he was nowhere near as drunk as I was. Nowhere. He used me as a convenience. And he didn’t care.

But the thing is that even though he has been the worst person ever to me he might not have known that he was assaulting me. To him it was not a big deal. I was, at least, one of his girlfriends. He didn’t look at it maliciously. He just looked at is as something normal to him. He could have sex with me half-conscious because in the morning he would cuddle with me and have sober sex.

This is a huge problem because whichever way you look at it, it is still rape. It is just disguised rape. And it has happened to countless of people I know.

I am lucky enough that while I endured a pretty traumatizing mental experience I was not taken forcefully and left with internal bruises, scars, or an ER room. As horrible as it sounds I find some solace in that and I find solace in what I have learned.

I do not ever owe someone sex no matter how many months or years I have been with that person. It is not my responsibly to worry about how much he wants it or how drunk he is or how flirtatious I am. And I will not defend or excuse people who act in this way even if they are my boyfriend. Rapists, assaulters, even those who just take advantage do not wear signs saying they do this. But sometimes they still do it and it is assault

I never talked much about my assault because I did not want to admit that I was one of those girls that had found herself in that situation. I always thought I was smart and confident with the ability to firmly say “no” when I did not want to do something. There was shame, guilt, and a heavy dose of discomfort knowing I was a statistic. Knowing that as much as I spoke about rape prevention, helping survivors of assault as well as leading The Vagina Monologues…I could not recognize what happened to me.

But all of it is not my fault, it was always his. And I am not overplaying or downplaying the situation recounting it, I am calling it exactly as is. Because the truth is he left me with the pain of feeling like he took me without my consent. He left me thinking that people do this to other people all the time. He left me scared and nervous about sex, unable to have it, and wondering about what that might mean for my romantic future.

I ran into him, Shawn, about a year or so ago. He was holding the hand of his new fiancé – now his wife. I was a lot of different feelings again. Angry. Fearful. Sad. Jealous even that he looked like he was having a great time while I still occasionally got emotional about us. I didn’t know what to do. I finally decided to keep on standing at the bar trying to make eye contact with him. Ten feet away, I kept my intense stare, thinking he would look back. I told people later I just wanted to see if he had the balls to glance in my direction but really I wanted to ask him something through that look. Do you feel bad for taking advantage of me? For any of it? But we never did make eye contact.

The Romanticization of Writer’s Depression (ADD, OCD, Anxiety, Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder, Autism, etc.)

…Why It Should Terrify Us and Why It Will Kill Usscream

(My face when I forget to take my Depression, ADD, Anxiety, medication Etc.)

This blog is meant to speak to writers and non writers alike. It is in no way meant to dismiss those who have taken their life or anyone having those feelings. If you do have those types of feelings, please call 1-800-273-8255 to speak about your crisis. Enjoy.

Ae Padilla

On any given day, via the internet, I might find myself reading a “Top 10 Amazing Writers Who Killed Themselves” list – recommended to me from a writing forum I frequently visit or a “suggested” post on Facebook.

Don’t worry. Don’t call me freaking out. Don’t send me to see a therapist (I already have a very lovely one!) I’m good. It’s not like that.

Just realize all writers do this. They revel in, swim in the idea of great artists who have come before them and paid the ultimate price for their work – their lives. If you don’t get it, if you don’t understand what I already mean by these first couple of sentences, then you never truly will. You aren’t a part of the club. You don’t have that shiny marquee above you with sparkling words which reads: “I’m depressed but at least I’ve got a good piece out of it.” And guess what? This is a club you don’t want to be a part of. This is the worst club of all clubs.

But if you do understand, if you are a writer (or an artist) who gets just as smug as you might get sad about that oh so inclusionary group of people, then you my dear are part of the problem. I know because I was part of that problem for a long time, still am, and I fight that urge every day to retreat into its devastating membership.

To be fair, if that’s what I want to call it, the umbrella of innovative depression (?) falls not only onto groups of people who self-identify as writers (novelists, screenwriters, poets) but also to anyone who views themselves as a performer. Actors, sculptors, painters, comedians, dancers, hell every bartender that ever lived probably fits somewhere in this creative realm.

Artists, those who flock to creative fields, are proven to have higher levels of mental disorders. They are more likely to suffer from anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, anorexia, and autism. And writers while being 121% more likely to be diagnosed with bipolar disorder are also nearly 50% more likely to commit suicide than the general population.

But the madness follows the gifted, from Kurt Cobain to Hunter S. Thompson to Robin Williams to Jack London to Virginia Woolf to David Foster Wallace to Anne Sexton to Norwegian artist Edvard Munch’s, who painted one of the most recognizable and haunting masterpieces “The Scream.” All of these talented creators worked their depression into their songs, their sets, and their sonnets but it is Munch who captured the internal mental threat in its simplicity.

Authors, like Sylvia Plath wrote extensively on the perils of depression and what it does to the human psyche but it can sometimes be a struggle to search for the meaning behind the words; like a needle in a haystack the reward is monumental but difficult to come by. Munch offers a brief paragraph on what inspired “The Scream” and how it played into his mental health.

The inspiration came to him when both he and his friend took a walk along the countryside to stare out onto a sunset.

“The sun began to set – suddenly the sky turned blood red. I stood there trembling with anxiety – and I sensed an endless scream passing through nature.”

It’s a beautiful sentence, and a beautiful painting. Honed as being the honest portrayal of a modern man overcome with angst, it is supposed to be identifiable to all. That’s what makes it so great.

Except that it isn’t. Because angst, sadness, I choose these words as carefully as can be, are not depression.

Munch, was not the representation of a normal worker. He was an artist who considered his paintings “his children.” Overcome by depression and hallucinations regularly, he participated in electroshock therapy. He wrote in his journals about his existence and work: “My fear of life is necessary to me, as is my illness. They are indistinguishable from me, and their destruction would destroy my art.”

This is not the everyday man, but this could be the everyday life of an artist or writer who sees suffering as the only valuable way to achieve some form of success. For it is the writer that often feels a kinship to their mental disorder, loathing it one day but proclaiming it as the ace in their back pocket the next, indebted to it at all times.

But how does it get this way? Is it the chicken or the egg? Did a writer want to write because they were depressed? Or are they depressed because they are writing?

Writing certainly accommodates for an unhealthy lifestyle. Fluctuating work hours and inconsistent pay checks, mixed with utter seclusion, unless you count the characters you create for days at a time can pretty much solidify that E.L Doctorow got it perfectly when he said “writing is a socially acceptable form of schizophrenia.”

But writing can stem from the mental disorder too, all before kids can form thoughts on why it is they want to pick up a pen. For many adults writing serves as a form of therapy. For children though, there are hardly as many reasons to point to. Most writers I know, myself included, never used writing as a way to document a terrible moment in our lives, we used it as a way to document our thoughts on it. Everything else came after, once puberty set in. It’s my experience that most writers have been writers for as long as they can remember.

Perhaps writing and mental health dance around each other unforgivingly as writing becomes the desire to make sense of a senseless world.

For it is through writing that purpose can be found, as often the page for authors is the voice they feel they do not have in their own life. It is my own feeling, confirmed by other writers, that writing has the power to make a writer feel wanted, accepted, and special…all of which are as life sustaining as air itself to those fighting a disease which often tells them they are exactly the opposite: a worthless dirty burden to everyone and everything. It is through writing, a love of beautifully strung together sentences, that writers get their high.

But what are they willing to do to get it? As Munch said, and I reiterated, are depression and writing interlinked, one able to live without the other? Or are writers willing to foster their depression in order to produce beautiful works for others at the expense of themselves?

It was Sylvia Plath who stated “I desire the things that will destroy me in the end.” In her work The Bell Jar depression is the seam which held her existence together. It is as if she is not quite sure what she would be without it, or rather what her work would be without it.

Other writers share this same question. What would their work be without the complication of feigned mental health? Would it help or hinder them? The question of whether or not they use their disease as a writing crutch becomes apparent.

Not all perhaps, but most (at one point including myself) have thought of it (“it” being anxiety, add, depression, compulsion, etc.) as a necessary evil. Our work would not be as authentic if we did not deal with the turmoil we feel and let it metamorphosize into words on a page.

If romance novels, children or commercial literature are not our forte then the only way to get the work we envision is to live through it. Similar to method acting this creates a very concerning course an author will take to channel a character or mood of a book.

I know, I’ve gone through it before, most recently with Ekland The Journal of Grayson Tyler Mitchell. The book was not light, the book forced me to take a mass murderers suicidal hand and follow him into the dark. If you think that you can write a book like that without being a little fucked up you are wrong. And to write that book well, you have to accept that you will get even more fucked up researching, writing, and ultimately editing the thing. Secluding yourself, as I did, is a giveaway.

If you had come to my apartment those two weeks of creating you would have found a stack of fast food piled high on my kitchen counter, not close to being taken out. There would have clothes thrown in every room, and me sitting at my dining room table, calling it a lucky day if I got to the shower. On any of those fourteen days I was spending up to twelve hours on the internet a day researching autopsy reports and suicide posts.

That might sound simply like the work of a dedicated novelist, and believe me it was. But I worry about other authors who hear this, who will shake their head and give me an impressed look like I reached gold club status. The rest of the population won’t get it or think it’s stupid, but neither of these reactions are correct.

To engulf yourself as a writer is one thing, to romanticize a living situation that breeds depression is another. It can be tempting to surrender yourself to the downward spiral for art but this does nothing but push yourself into an unhappier place while re-establishing that those other authors who “write happy” are inauthentic, they are part of those who developed talent and did not inherit it (which in the writer’s world is kind of saying that you might be OK but you can never be as good as us. So yeah don’t sit with us.)

See in the writing community, suffering is a currency of talent. It’s as if our characters sadness are only as authentic as our own. And this presents itself to be even more terrible when we look to our idols as our inspiration.

Not every creative person kills themselves. Not every creative person has mental health problems. But often us writers focus on the big picture, the people who make every tick of a keyboard (or typewriter) worth it, the end game so to speak if by some miracle we become as lucky as we are talented. And the majority of these people we praise had mental health problems and committed suicide.

Writers like anyone in a profession look up to the people who achieved the ultimate success. Pulitzer, a Newbery Medal, an Oscar. Great engineers look up to great engineers. Great physicians look up to great physicians. I’m not going to name any of those esteemed professionals because I don’t want to embarrass myself, but ask yourself: what does this do for our psyches if the people we hold in such high esteem, our mentors, take their own life?

There is no shame in suicide, but when you as a writer consider that your favorite novelist accepted his Nobel Prize in Literature and then decided to kill himself only a few years later with his “favorite shotgun” you have to wonder what attributes you really want to take away from that person.

Is any work worth the emotional turmoil that a writer possesses as they write it? The only way to answer that question is if you revel in the disease for the sake of the work itself, which unfortunately many do.

Otherwise I will say what every writer might hate me for.

There is no work good enough to ruin your mental health for. One more time. This has taken me years to accept. There is no masterpiece that is worth the lowest quality of your life. I say this as someone who would give up almost everything for my work except my mental health.

Too often we writers believe that anti-depressants, mood stabilizers are the death of our stories. In my case it started off with ADD medication. When I was first prescribed my pills at the age of eleven, I had two aversions to them. Their size. And their effects on my creativity. I caught myself thinking, in middle school, “what if I can’t write as well on them? What if I am not myself anymore and it effects my novels?” (never mind I would not finish a novel until eight years later.)

BUT ALL WRITERS DO THIS. We speak about how pills will ruin our characters, how it will lead us to a lack of depth and understanding needed to get our work published. We refuse assistance. We deny reports of people who claim that SSRIs have helped them. We focus on Reddit users who claim their writing has faltered with prescriptions. It doesn’t have that same “spark” they say, and we run up to everyone and say “see?” because we know exactly what they are talking about. With one post we feel vindicated in our paranoia.

Perhaps they may be right, maybe some medications will stifle whatever we all have that makes us artists. The X factor. But the willingness to not talk about medication at all with the right person or doctor – even to start that conversation on the bare level of asking “could it help me” is irresponsible.

This isn’t to say that all depressed writers should get on a prescription, but this is to say that we all need to stop announcing how wonderful it is when we see another writer cripple themselves in poverty for ten years before they get published, and applaud it as “part of the steps to success,” because yes the average age a novelist sells their first book to a publisher is a few years above thirty.

Speaking and writing about writers who took their own lives gives us a way to understand the trouble similar writers might be having toady, viewing photos of modern day women sticking their head in an oven and photo-shopping it with a black and white filter does not.

Our depression is not a quirky personality traits we can nod in agreement to when people victimize us for acting out the script of an over-emotional troubled person.

And worse, we cannot as writers do it to ourselves. By fawning over the dead in unhealthy ways it perpetuates, not the last by any means, but a huge other problem…needing to rid the world of ourselves if our work does not sell or if we do not believe we can ever achieve the level of success we are comfortable with.

Writing is the only profession where it is perfectly acceptable to say a comment like “well at least I might be good at my job when I am dead.”

Can you imagine saying that in regards towards any other profession? “I’m working my ass off over here, the reward might not come when I am alive but maybe one hundred years from now when I am dead in the ground people will proclaim how great my work was back then, and somehow someway I might be able to know that.”

No wonder writers are prone to depression! The very essence of who they are, how and what they write, is a constant shot in the dark which might not even get slightly recognized.

But other writers understand that, and it is the strength to accept the mental disorders and depression for “the craft” that we need for ourselves. And that’s not easy. Just as pin pointing the disease is not easy.

Writing about anxiety, depression, is what we do. It’s natural for us. Everything from its “living hell” to the following are my own thoughts about the whirlwind of emotions that constantly plague us…

‘I felt as if the world lost color the more I lived in it. As if the flowers, the trees, the sky itself had become as equally as drained of life as my mind had. I often found myself wondering if people were better at lying than I was. Or if they were living in a happier more colorful place. Momentary joy for me was just that – momentary. A beautiful person. A beautiful conversation. It was ships passing in the night, a dark void I could not hold onto. And it was my responsibility, in secret of course, to try to hold onto these instances – to store them in a glass bottle for the day I would need them, when that world was once again a monochromatic existence of my own doing.’

But I suppose the words in this case don’t mean everything, they don’t even mean anything. The steps to stop romanticizing depression start at the center from fellow writers who talk about the problem as effecting the person and not the work, and who pay tribute to writers who have been lost with solidarity not camaraderie. It stops with those who question “lists of writers who have committed suicide” when those lists fail to provide a safe place for artists in need of people to reach out to.

Progress starts with open discussions, being there for another storyteller when they are not just in that terrible halfway point of their manuscript but also when they feel like they lost something once they are done with it, after all it was Truman Capote who said: “finishing a book is just like you took a child out in the back yard and shot it.” Because finishing a project can be a wonderful moment for a creator but it can also be a devastating one.

And so there is nothingness in depression and despair in suicide. But there are no pretty corpses. Nooses are not necklaces.

What They Don’t Talk About on the Bell Tower Tour


bell tower shooting

(“Yes, kids I did go here when you could only carry around Nerf Guns.”)

Margaret Whitman, Kathy Whitman, Edna Townsley, Marguerite Lamport, Mark Gabour, Claire Wilson, Thomas Eckman, Dr. Robert Boyer, Thomas Ashton, Thomas Karr, Billy Speed, Harry Walchuk, Paul Sonntag, Claudia Rutt, Roy Schmidt, Karen Griffith, David Gunby, RIP.

Ae Padilla


I’ll get right to it. I love The Bell Tower. What UT student/alumnus doesn’t? For as long as I can remember I have been fascinated by its architecture, its carillons, and the way it stands as an iconic symbol for both this campus and city.

The Tower provides us with so much. It lets us know when our horns win. It gives us chimes to listen to when we walk to class. It has the most beautiful life science library inside of it – something straight out of Hogwarts. Many events have happened in and around out it since construction first began on it in 1934 including, of course, the infamous 1966 shooting.

So it came as a surprise to me when, on my tour of The Tower in my last semester at Texas, I asked one of the tour guides if the rails and extra security on the observation deck were because of the shooting. Their response was that they were not allowed to talk about it.

To say I was perplexed and angered would be an understatement.

I understand how it could be morbid and uncomfortable discussing the 15 deaths committed by Charles Whitman from the observation deck and 2 elsewhere. I understand how the conversation could be considered offensive and might put a damper on the otherwise beautiful view you are greeted to as you stand on the 28th floor looking out onto the Austin skyline. I get that even after 50 years it’s still a very sensitive issue thinking that one of our students committed a horrendous act against his fellow longhorns.

But guess what? It happened.

And not speaking about it makes it seem like those that died are never remembered because we as a University do not like acknowledging that it indeed happened.

As a student I knew about the incident before I decided to take the tour. I had read about it, discussed it with others, and even wrote about it for a paper on school shootings – a subject I have researched thoroughly. But others on the tour, many who were from different countries and spoke various languages, were blissfully unaware of what happened on that observation deck many years ago. Unlike me, they had no idea who Houston McCoy or Billy Speed were. They had no idea that The Tower was closed for years following the tragedy.

Some might say it’s a good thing to not draw negative attention to the University; after all, the murders did occur more than half a century ago and bringing it up certainly reminds us of the ever growing number of shootings that have become almost normal in our country. People might be scared that recalling this particular event is in some twisted way a glorification of the act itself and that we should all just move on with our lives.

But to be quite honest not talking about the massacre is actually the worst thing we as a University can do.

We must acknowledge our former classmates, professors, and Austinites. We must acknowledge the victims of the senseless crime, and we must do it even if it makes us extremely uncomfortable.

While it’s important to mention The Main Building does have a memorial garden which hosts a plaque honoring those killed, it does not have one from where the massacre occurred. This one plaque The Tower does have, displayed where few people visit and placed as recently as 1999, is not enough.

I do not suggest the whole tour of The Tower focus solely on the mass shooting.  A simple line stating what happened might be enough or even a moment of silence might commemorate the lives that were ended too shortly. Perhaps another plaque in the lobby with the victims’ names will provide more awareness. All these things would be more fitting than giving these sixteen individuals no recognition at all. (At the time of publishing this article I have been made aware of a new plaque near “Turtle Pond” only recently erected.)

At the end of the tour walking back to my apartment I had a few questions formulating in my head.

Why does UT think they can eradicate an important part of history? Why do they want to? Have we learned nothing about the horrors of ignoring the truth about sensitive but important information? Why does it take filmmakers and authors who are not a part of the Longhorn family to bring attention to this?

Throughout my four years of education at the University of Texas at Austin I learned that the most important lesson is what coincidentally is printed on The Main Building itself: Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.

By us acknowledging the truth of what happened from atop The Tower we let go of some of the mystery and the shame that still lingers within us. We accept that it happened and pay recognition to those who helped that day without glorifying the act itself. And we also become open about the mental problems the perpetrator did face as we vow to help others who might be in that position.

We become a University that is proud of so many successes The Tower represents but we also realize that every piece of history has a dark side to it. We continue to be the amazing progressive school that we have always been.

Especially now with campus carry taking effect, ironically on the anniversary of the shooting, do we want our legacy as that great school to be one of rather denial, hatred, and more guns? Are those the answer to the problems we have realized are evident but still have not fully discussed?

I don’t know about you but I think it’s time we pay our respects to the victims and reclaim our Tower.


This article was rejected from appearing in The Daily Texan in 2014 and was partially edited in spring and summer of 2016


Do the Gilmore Girls Get Their Periods? (or Do They Just Never Talk About It?)


(Above: “I can’t remember if I took out my tampon before I put the new one in.” “Mom…”)

THANK YOU Amy Sherman-Palladino for giving me these amazing characters I like to pretend I am exactly like. Also, trigger warning for dumb-asses who can’t read about periods. Copper Boom!

Ae Padilla

For a show that revolves completely around women, you think that there would be talk about the one shitty thing all women can unite over. Periods. Code Red. Aunt Flo. That time of the month. Sharkweek baby (and I’m not talking about the Discovery Channel segment.)

But in the entire seven seasons that make up Amy Sherman-Palladino’s Gilmore Girls, a one hour dramedy that takes place in the fictional town of Stars Hollow and follows the lives of “freakishly close” mother and daughter, Lorelai and Rory Gilmore (the protagonists of this wonderfully fast-talking show) never talk about bleeding from their vaginas. In all 153 episodes never a joke or reference has been made from or about the Gilmore Girls needing a tampon or craving even crappier food than they normally eat, all because of those weirdly specific monthly troubles every female has.

And it’s a damn shame because Gilmore Girls (and Sherman-Palladino with her no-nonsense blunt bad-assery attitude) would be just the type of show to rightfully address this.

Originally airing on the WB and in its final season the CW, Gilmore Girls does not equate modesty with womanhood. It does not pander to a certain audience that believes womanhood must be discreetly discussed. Gilmore Girls never shies away from virginity, sex, birth, and even death all involving women characters who have different experiences and opinions on these issues. For a show that has been described as truly feminist on a network which to my knowledge is not crazy controlling about any topic regarding a female’s body, it is strange then that there is never even one throw-away line about periods.

Nope, periods are never mentioned amid other female bodily discussions in this show. Nor are they brought up as a plot device or simply as a way of life. Gilmore Girls may get credit for being feminist and voicing “the real,” yet the reality of periods is not presented in this series (with hardly a credible reason for its elimination, unless we are supposed to believe that the WB or CW did not ‘ok’ a “surfing the crimson wave” reference.)

In this case, the case of mentioning Lorelai and Rory’s periods, the benefits would undoubtedly outweigh the cons, as the cons would probably only result in losing the seventeen male viewers the show originally had (I’m of course kidding but in reality if a man is already watching Gilmore Girls I doubt he will be disgusted by the mere mention of a menstrual cycle.)

The first reason for talking about it? The entertainment on pure face value.

When I am bored, watching TV, captivated by a particularly annoying Kotex commercial, I wonder what the Gilmore Girls would talk about if they were, at that moment, right next to me eating mac and cheese. Would Lorelai, as Lorelai always does bust out the line “Are we really supposed to believe that it’s blue? What man out there said ‘hey all the red food coloring got used for Evil Dead so let’s just sprinkle in a few drops of water?’” Or maybe we would get a quip from Rory herself, walking out of the bathroom we only see two times in the entire series (for those Gilmore Girls fanatics out there I’ve narrowed it down to when Paris borrows Lorelei’s clothes for a date with Tristan,when Rory is crying over douche-bag Logan, and when a fish is swimming around in the tub – if there are other times please dispute me but not about the fact that I called Logan an asshole.) She (Rory) would be mumbling to herself, towel in hand, “do you ever think the girl in Psycho didn’t actually die and it was just a really bad time of the month?”

Can you imagine, as I frequently do, Lorelai taking over Luke’s apartment with her decorations and collection of must-have CDs, but also occupying his bathroom with Tampax boxes? Can you imagine her walking through Doose’s Market trying to describe in detail the ins and outs of all things period to her backwards baseseball cap wearing diner-owner? Or perhaps interaction about periods would mostly be with Rory who would be unable to decide what device to use in an episode opening – all the while Lorelai creating voices for said tampon and pad, both fighting each other about who can catch the most blood. My god, do we not all want to know her opinions on the DivaCup come Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life?  I cannot be the only one hoping for that specific niche of comedic genius!

All humor aside, the best thing about Gilmore Girls is the different opinions we have via intellectual, charming, and witty women. What would occur when Lorelai and Rory talk about their periods is the immediate understanding of the series as a whole, which is that the show does not cater to the male demographic as most network television programs do; the normal monthly occurrence of a period in virtually any woman of a certain age is not going to be ignored because it might make some ignorant people “uncomfortable.”

Sure TV programs, since their origin, have held entire episodes regarding the issue of a woman getting her period, including one of my favorite episodes of The Cosby Show “The Infantry Has Landed (And They’ve Fallen Off The Roof)” where Rudy Huxtable gets her period while at school and is sent home to join her mother, who is excited to discuss Rudy’s changing body and celebrate with her in a “woman’s day.” But all instances of comedy (a few jokes about pads being the sizes of mattresses) is glossed over with an important message. The important message is that a period is something that might be a “curse” but it is also special. It signifies that you are now about to enter a different part of your life and one day, if you choose, you will have the option of having children. It is a vital lesson to learn for any young girl entering puberty that this particular show covered tastefully.

But Gilmore Girls, as it hopefully does elsewhere in other areas of the series, would be able to shed a funnier truth on “parting the red sea” (give me a break here I am running out of euphemisms), serving as a new narrative for women at a different point in their lives who are able to not only realize what a period means to growing up but also what it means to their daily existence (such as dating, going on vacation, or even wearing white pants.) If Gilmore Girls is a show that both mothers and daughters bond over watching together how can this not be something that would realistically come up? And isn’t Gilmore Girls almost doing us a disservice by not talking about how special a period can be but also, more importantly, how annoying it can be too? And how bonds of mother and daughter may even be strained by the awkwardness of this inevitable talk (AKA Emily Gilmore totally gave her maid a book to give to Lorelai about what she could expect from her cycle.)

Of course I was not in the writer’s room (although if Netflix does continue this revival, I am here half-finished spec in hand.) Again, perhaps potential period jokes were censored. However I have a bit of a hard time believing that if Sherman-Palladino could manage to get jokes about slaves and prostitution on the air this would not be any more difficult. Is the answer for the question of why there is no talk about periods simply that Sherman-Palladino did not deem it necessary or did simply not want it?

If it indeed was the latter would it not be better to have a humorous bit not made for a laugh track or even for the simplicity of grossing a guy out, but as a way for woman to bond over shitty days and stained underwear? Or even as stated before, different women’s opinions on say what they do to take away cramps? I would even settle for the alienating opinion of “it’s not that bad if you have sex on it” by Miss Patty. This is a show that talks openly and candidly about sex and the pill (in its first season mind you) but the only mention we get of a period is Lorelai’s lack of possibly having one and wondering whether she may be pregnant due to the fact she is craving an apple (yes, an apple) after her and Luke have drunken unprotected sex.

Perhaps this can all be answered with a viewpoint from one of my very good friends: the Gilmore Girls do not simply ever have their period. They are aliens sent to us with their gorgeous eyes, carousel of hot men, Rolodex of pop-culture references, and their status as rulers of the town of Stars Hollow all without ever worrying about going up to another woman and asking them discreetly to check their jeans on a particularly heavy day.

Lorelai Gilmore has never stained a pair of white pants. Just when I couldn’t love/hate you more. DAMN YOU LORELAI.

*Once again I give all of my respect to Sherman-Palladino and look forward to her next creation. On another note, I do not in any way condone or brush off Bill Cosby and his sexual assaults on women. I am simply referencing an episode of The Cosby Show.

Too Many Questions. One Answer. What We Can Learn From the Murder of Haruka Weiser.


(Pictured above on the right: Haruka Weiser. Age 18. Left: Weiser at Age 15 performing in the Portland Ballet.)

I give all of my condolences and respect to the Weiser family and to those who were close to Haruka.

Ae Padilla

Two weeks ago a woman was brutally murdered on the campus that I attended college at, at the place that I used to write at well into the night.

She had just finished leaving a dance class/rehearsal sometime close to 9:30 pm when a man she had never met followed her on her walk back to her dorm and ended her life. She was found two days later in a creek that runs through The University of Texas at Austin after her roommate had reported her missing.

Waller Creek, the scene of this unfathomable crime, was a place I used to walk by periodically on my way to study groups and Longhorn football games.

I know it’s wrong, to relate every single action of hers that night, and where she was found, to myself. I did not personally know this woman or experience violence as she did. But I am a woman who walked her same path when I too was a student. I am a woman whose greatest fear is what she lived through.

Since the murder of Haruka Weiser, 18, Wieser’s name has entered many a conversation in the Austin area. Law enforcement, friends, family, members from the community have reacted in disbelief that this could happen in a close knit environment like UT. The University of Texas might have a population of fifty thousand students but the campus feels very much like a home on the cozy forty acres, and as such people had a lot to say about the devastating situation.

“Weiser was a beautiful and compassionate person. A beautiful woman like that did not deserve to get murdered.” I heard this statement a lot from many different people closely and distantly related to Weiser. I heard this alongside words such as: tragic, disturbing, and heartbreaking.

All saying this mean well. There is no denying that Haruka Weiser was an attractive talented woman. She had gifts not seen in many people her age, and a spirit that shines through her pictures with her love for dance and life. The world was robbed of a very special person for absolutely no reason.

But the world was also robbed of a person, first and foremost. And whether she was perceived as physically beautiful should not matter in the slightest as to how we react to her worth as a person.

Weiser’s life should not be confined to her skills as a ballerina or as her status as a former Texas student.

To remember her and pay her tribute in this way is understandable, especially to those of us who were not fortunate enough to know all the facets of this individual. Her life, unfortunately by default, becomes a number of small points we have to refer to – fast descriptors placed above the fold.

But in describing her as such and not taking the time to discover more about her, rather speaking more of her talent than her beauty, we commit our first mistake. We as a society focus on the physicality of this victim as we often do with good-looking women who are victims of violent murders in the United States.

When we say comments like “Weiser did not deserve to be murdered” we state by default that other people’s lives are worth less – including people who are unattractive, untalented, or not fortunate enough to have a caring family like Weiser. We maintain the narrative of the Missing White Woman Syndrome – a phrase coined by social scientists given to the extensive media coverage of missing attractive females as compared to men and people of color.

Although Weiser, a Japanese-American native from Portland, Oregon has received media attention because of the nature and location of the crime, she can still act as a catalyst of questions we should be asking in the weeks to follow that play into this theory.

For those unware, the suspect in custody for Weiser’s murder is a homeless seventeen-year-old black male named Meechaiel Criner, who was arrested by the Austin Police Department after he was recognized on security footage taken from the night of the murder near Darrell K Royal Memorial Stadium. Caught with Weiser’s laptop and personal belongings his bond is set at 1 million dollars.

Following the arrest of the suspect, comment boards and Reddit forums filled up with divisive comments such as “how about black lives matter now?” But taxing as it is, talking about the alleged killer as being homeless, at the very least, is what might help us prevent future horrendous attacks. This is not to imply that I believe Criner committed this act because of his questionable upbringing and turning to the streets as much as I condone the violent act itself, but to turn the crime into discussion is better than what we inevitably will do with it.

In much the same way that the argument of gun control is ignited by shootings so should the topic of race represented in the media and violence against woman by the murder of Haruka Weiser. This should not be confused as capitalizing on a family’s pain for an agenda but rather implementing what the Weiser family themselves have asked for.

Following the painful task of identifying their daughter, Haruka Weiser’s parents (family) released a press statement with the following: “Although Haruka loved to perform on stage she never sought the spotlight in her daily life. Perhaps the last thing she would want is to be the poster child for any cause. And yet, as we struggle to understand why she was killed, if her death can somehow make it safer for a young woman to walk home, if it will prevent another assault or murder, then at least we could find some meaning behind an otherwise senseless and tragic death.”

With this incredibly passionate and sensitive speech comes a declaration of productivity and not complacency, the key component in how we can make sense of this atrocious act.

It is a fine line to tell people how to mourn. But if the Weiser family can garner the strength so then should the community, creating a call to action that includes not just asking questions simply for the sake of reaffirming the dialogue that surrounds our nation but asking them in hopes that it is the step for a movement.

The first being the issue of race. Weiser, without her consent, has actually become the poster child for brutal crimes committed against white women, at least temporarily. But what if we pose the question of whether or not Weiser would receive as much attention if she was black or if she herself was homeless? Do we denounce homeless people in this country as not being worthy of our nightly news when they are indeed killed at staggering rates? Do we struggle to have the same empathy for an unattractive person or a person of color as we would for a beautiful woman society as least perceives to be white?

In that same regard we are already classifying people in their murder based on their talents rather than the fact that they are simply humans. But we shouldn’t be surprised at this. We do this also in terms of what sex is targeted in an attack such as Weiser’s.

The missing white women syndrome could be a misrepresentation of those unaware of the fear that woman feel every time they walk alone at night. Because the facts point to that assaulted women are not overrepresented in the media, they are underrepresented. They are simply not discussed enough because their case is not as public as Weiser’s. Although it may be against social conventions to discuss the confirmed sexual assault of the victim it poses a significance that Weiser was targeted for many reasons – but the most important being that she was seen as a defenseless woman at night, particularly on the night of Sunday, April 4th.

To those, and there are many, saying that all people should be more vigilant, I raise the question of whether Criner would have attacked a man of similar stature to Weiser? The answer of course is no. Weiser was attacked and assaulted because of the perceived power that Criner felt he had when he saw her alone and distracted by her phone. Surveillance cameras show him waiting for hours for what he felt was the “perfect” victim. The perfect victim was a woman first and foremost. And Weiser’s family make a reference to this in their statement about women, not men’s safety, in particular.

But what if Weiser survived? In a more just-filled world this would happen, but the significance of the crime would have been diminished to nothing more than a campus email about an assault that happened near San Jacinto Street. As devastating as Weiser’s death is, it shines a light to where many sensitive issues can be discussed. Beauty as inherently a more devastating loss, race, a lack of disregard towards homeless sexual assault victims, and also how we deal with assault that does not end in the taking of a life. Weiser’s death can then act as a representation of the struggles that women face daily, and the dismissal of inflicted violence on them if it does not indeed reach the peril of “nightly news.”

It’s not enough to state that this is a random act that can happen anywhere and anytime, two contrasting lives that intersected as a result of nothing more than chance. Criner (allegedly) killed Wesier because of her accessibility in being a woman. Not because she was drinking too much, because she wore provocative clothing, or even because she was beautiful. And that is not chance, it is choice.

Is that why this case lingers in the air? Is that why it terrifies us? Because no matter what, we as women can’t be “blamed” at all as rape culture states they should? Even if you do not believe it there are people who highlight the idea that she should not have been glancing down at her phone, who scoff at the idea that she walked through a wooded area with less lighting when there was an alternate but longer path back to her dorm with brighter lighting. These people who say this are terrible humans, there is hardly a better insult that would not end up with me writing explicates, but they still pose the idea of change – an idea of productivity as stated rather than complacency.

Because mourning, being sad, not wanting to talk about it is complacency for the idea that women need to protect themselves more, or worse accept that in all protection these things simply just…happen.

My first thought after hearing the initial news about the missing girl who would later be identified as Weiser was “This is disgusting. This is terrible. This breaks my heart. I need to take even more precautions about going out late because you never who might be around. I need to stop looking at my phone. Guess I am not writing at UT anymore.” My feelings were genuine and my intentions were in the right place to think of Haruka’s autonomy being violated even if I focused on myself as well, but in relation to me vigilance is never enough, and unfortunately sadness in reflecting on this is fleeting. And comments that I made and others made are often lazy. We can honor a life, and fight back without violence to the suspect and to people who commit these crimes by speaking passionately about the victim. But we have to learn to fight back in our own way. In a productive way.

And we need to do this by maintaining our anger, because it is the anger towards the injustice in this case that will demand action. An eighteen-year-old woman with a talented spirit that could help the world was brutally murdered on a college campus walking back to her dorm. A .3 mile walk at 9:30 pm. She was overpowered by a knife, sexually assaulted, and then thrown into a creek like she was a piece of trash. As a result her parents will never spend another day with her. Her brother and sister will never have another conversation with her. Why is that not making us livid?

Disregard the need to say that she was someone’s sister, daughter, or girlfriend when the context makes you feel more for her because she might be your daughter, sister, or girlfriend. Consider her a person of the world instead, and realize that being sad is never good enough.

I’ve come across a few options in the recent days of how to better preserve Haruka Weiser’s memory. The first is a suggestion to create a program called Weiser Walk, in which alumni donate to make a free program for students who need an escort to walk with at any time of the day. This is empowering rather than giving into fear, as we make it a part of a campus lifestyle not just temporary emphasized because of what happened. This is something I would donate to in a heartbeat.

We create programs that educate people on the assaults that happen that do not get as much coverage given that victims are willing to speak about them. And then we have programs geared particularly towards men that focus on stopping rape culture in small ways (jokes at a women’s expense and acknowledging their privilege) to big ways (stopping an assault even if he believes he might see a sexual activity of two other drunk people as not his problem.)

These may or not have helped Haruka Weiser that night but they establish a world that Haruka Weiser should have lived in and that the rest of women should live in.

We can retain lessons beyond lessons from the murder of Haruka Weiser. And we can turn once again to her parents, who created a scholarship in her name for dancers who want to be further trained in her hometown of Portland. They are exemplifying what we should do. They were more effected than we could ever think to be; they are doing something about it though.

They are not simply releasing a press statement flourished in the word “beautiful” or speaking of the prayers they seek.

See, I’ll say it even if you mean the best.

Your sadness is wasted if it never morphs into anything else.


Rest in peace Haruka Weiser. Dance in heaven.

Why I Wrote Ekland


(From the movie Zero Day, by Ben Coccio. Don’t go down the rabbit hole of googling pipe bomb instructions)

This was written one day before Christopher Harper-Mercer opened fire in a classroom at a community college in Roseburg Oregon.

Ae Padilla

One of the first memories I have in my life is of watching television, the program was something similar to 20/20, and the highlighted real was of a fuzzy home video. Two boys live in an affluent neighborhood and drive by this woman on a bike with paintballs and shoot at her multiple times, then yell at each other asking if she is dead.

She was.

The thing is they didn’t know her, they had no reason to shoot at her, it was simply something fun to do — and that was what was traumatizing to me. This is called “sport killings.”

Since then (and perhaps too just as a defining personality trait) I have always been someone who absolutely detests violence. It makes me uncomfortable. Sure injustice as well but it is violence that packs a different – for lack of a better metaphor –punch. And I’m not talking about Batman and Robin action sequences, gladiator stories, or Saw films (I’ve actually watched all the Saw films 5 times each.) I’m talking about real senseless violence. Those stories where a seemingly normal couple in a subdivision is really holding a 16 year old girl captive in their basement and raping her. The story about someone leaving their dog tied up for hours without water in 100 degree weather and then beating it when it cries. Of course I also (who doesn’t?) can’t fathom or stand random senseless killings, most often associated in our culture now as mass killing sprees.

So of course, because writing is tapping into the scary and the interesting, and make no mistake about it what I am scared of I almost always am also fascinated by too, I decided to focus my third novel EKLAND The Journal of Grayson Tyler Mitchell exactly on that.

Ekland, at 48,500 words, is based loosely off the Columbine High School massacre, another event I am nearly obsessed with and have been since I decided to dig into it fully during high school for a school violence article in my journalism class.

Spurning all of this is the novel that I wrote because of that fascination.

The novel like anything started as a thought.

And my thought, like almost everyone I know after reading all about Columbine was WHY?

Sure I could have researched more to satisfy that need (I did). I could have bought the theory of those writing dissertations, of those newscasters on CNN, of groups of concerned parents. To me what wasn’t enough, to me that wasn’t going to tell me the WHY. That was going to tell me the HOW. And the HOW is never as interesting.

Why does anyone have the drive to kill someone? Why does anyone have the drive to kill multiple people? And then let’s take it a little further and let’s focus on this particular massacre again. Why did Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold want to do it? Why did no one see this coming? Why did they find and trust each other? Why did they want to commit suicide? Why did they commit suicide? Why did they go to prom one week before they planned to blow up their school? Why did they listen to the music they did? Why did that matter? Why did they film it all? And was there a moment when they were looking to be saved?

The thing is I don’t have these questions about other killers, about people who go and stab their wife when they find them with a new lover, I can be disgusted by that but I can get that. That’s revenge. But not with Aurora, not with Virginia Tech, and not with Columbine.

Is revenge a part of it? Of course. But is it all of it? No.

If we can buy the fact that these humans are human enough to put on death row than we have to realize they are human in every aspect. They are multi-faceted individuals. They are more than the last thing they did although they will be defined by it forever. They are not worth studying and writing about for glorification but for understanding.

And I write to understand. I wrote the Brigades of Aldo as a true piece of adolescents preserved, the struggles of growing up, the personification of love, why I was the way I was senior year before college. I wrote Across Eight States to understand why someone in my life acted the way he did, how he treated me, and found that I stumbled upon a story about family, racism, and poverty. I wrote Ekland because I needed to know why Klebold and Harris did what they did, but in my head I took it a step further. I wanted to see the world from their eyes and I wanted to tell the rest of the world what they were thinking. Because if it was intriguing me this much it must mean something. (For the record, this idea has been rolling around in my head for give or take two and a half years.)

As a result of those thoughts came research and research and more research. I was grateful that I had already done that research for “fun” but now I needed to do more. I needed to pour over Klebold and Harris’ journals. I needed to watch all their homemade videos, because I couldn’t write a story in good conscious about the people who did this without connecting and understanding my protagonist. And I needed to do this fast because the book demanded it. As with any tough situation, pulling the Band-Aid off was the best thing that I could do.

I spent two weeks writing this novel, more editing it than writing, and in those two weeks I entered a world that was gritty, disturbing, and void of any type of hope. Six hours a day of writing did this to me, leaving me feeling physically exhausted. I’ve spent my life at a desk…and this was different.

It was the result of getting so close to a fire but not actually touching it — it was becoming a part of Klebold and seeing himself in me.

I don’t mean that in the way people fear that others will, rather that I began to understand more of the why rather than the how.

With the dismissal of what I’m saying as trivial or egotistical, the ordinary person cannot write a book like Ekland. Or cannot write it convincingly. Because relating to at least some part of your characters is needed, at least of course for an author like me. And writing a first person book is not omniscient, it’s going straight into the battle field of morbidity. It’s telling the world the bold face lie. This is some, if not all, of what he was thinking. It is taking away how other people view these people and instead focusing on how they view themselves.

Ekland for me really was about the mental health issues, the idea that 80 percent of those who wanted to commit attacks like this at one point wanted to kill themselves. 80 percent, that’s not revenge on someone else. That’s revenge on yourself. That’s allowing the power of the thoughts and brain to control you. And that’s what I could bring to Ekland and more importantly what I thought was important to bring to it.

Destruction of others can only come when you destroy yourself first, and with Tyler that came from thoughts, crippling thoughts of suicide.

I wrote Tyler as a male because that was the only way he would be taken seriously. Because he lived in entitlement. It was the same way I wrote him rich and from suburbia. I wrote him depressed for this reason too and I felt that I could do him and Klebold justice with this.

Like Klebold, at one point I lived in a world with such tunnel vision that I could never see real happiness and empathy for myself. I lived for moments of peace as rare as they were. Finding joy in my life, permanent joy, did not come from my amazing surroundings (and I did have great surroundings like Tyler) It came from me inside. And the me inside was unknowingly self-sabotaging. But like anyone with some mental problems my brain was talking to me and lying to me and saying I was worthless.

Through my own mental battle and personal journal entries, I gave some to Tyler in hopes that it would make him a more relatable person and bring about more sympathy and more concern. And because of course the Columbine killers, particularly Klebold, thought these things themselves. If the novel had ended after part one I like to believe viewer would feel bad for this individual, would really see –excuse the vulgarity – how fucked up he is. But because of part two we don’t feel bad for him.

My hope is that we catch people at part one of their story and not at part three.

Of course Ekland brought and brings me concern, I sent it out to agents in hope of a pull but I still have a responsibility. I created this work and I know how art in any form can be influential. But I’m also selfish, and if you can bear with me here unselfish as well.

I wrote something that scares me, that is not me, and I hope that is at the very least real. I don’t want people to say I wrote a good male as a female. I want people to say I wrote a messed up good male period. So that means wanting to make a work I’m proud of in public, to garner that attention on the level of “it’s just about me and my career and showing that I can truly write.” This might have come after Brigades and Across Eight States and it might be about teenagers but I have versatility. I am not one note and this not West Texas or Route 66. I can do gritty, I can do it very well. I’m capable of having the privilege of a unisex brain.

But in all honesty I’m unselfish too in my hopes. I want to start a dialogue about killers that is not about gun control and the left and right. I want to tackle mental health and I do want to tackle the infamy and the blasé.

Because if the reiterated point is anything it’s this. We dismiss these people. We want to hate them for hating others but we dare not hate them for hating themselves. If the battle is in your head, “they” say, then fix it and don’t involve me. But if it’s involves someone else…then I’ll care.

We think the bombers, gunmen, don’t have thoughts like this, the ones I wrote about, but they do. Many might not be this eloquent or this dark or extensive but again, most of the time there is something.

Understanding, as what I did and hopefully the reader does, is not condoning. Nor is it saying that understanding on some level means that it will never happen again. If we just do a, b, and c we are good. Because it will happen again. A lack of reaching out in time is just as vital as wanting to be reached out to. And some people, it’s taken me a while to say this, are just psychopaths. They will kill because they were born that way. They want the fame and they get off on destroying. And no therapist or God can help them, they’re like a bad dog that needs to be put down for society. Yes it’s hard writing that, which is why I didn’t write that! I wrote a real human. A real human who wanted to be understood and involved and cured. He was on the line of countless of problems but I like to believe there was a cure to them. To bring back my point I think of Marilyn Manson (a man solely responsible for Columbine if you can believe it because the killers listened to his songs) who was asked what he would tell the Columbine killers if they were here today. His response? “I wouldn’t say a thing I would listen to them which no one ever did.”

Tyler has traits of a psychopath but in the end he has thoughts about love and he has some bit of remorse and he kills people in cold blood anyway, which to be honest is worse, and I wrote it for that “worseness”. Because the excuse is not there and the sentiment to him is real. He is going to kill people as a person with a lot of mental problems but not without lack of a conscious. Again, isn’t that the person we actually want to read about?

What did I get out of Ekland? I empathized a little more, and weirdly enough after a while I was desensitized, there was a time when I couldn’t look at Dylan and Eric’s suicide photo in the library. Now, minus the fact that it’s insensitive to any human, it can sit right there on a tab open up next to Twitter and whatever YouTube video is relevant that day. Again terrible, but the truth is usually terrible.

I learned that they deserve forgiveness too, and that their families need more support than just about anyone. I learned that saying their names might lead to contagion, something which again makes me nervous about releasing something like this to the world. But that’s my truth and I must state my truth and I hope people see my intentions are truly the best. I want parents and peers to look at this as the most honest wakeup call.

I learned young minds are impressionable but I did not write this book for young minds, this by no means is young adult. I wrote it for people who are older, who know that back when you’re 17 you don’t have it all figured out, and that despite not having depression, tunnel vision exists in high school. Everything is the end of the world and in this case according to Grayson Tyler Mitchell it should be.

I learned that they harbored a level of rage that I can never understand. That on that day they put on a show and became who they wanted the world to see them as. Everything from their attire, to their weapons of choice, to their name. Would Tyler want to be seen as Grayson? Of course not. He would want to be seen as Anarchy, because Anarchy demands respect.

I learned even that they, Klebold and Harris, Reb and vodka might want me saying this twenty years later, mulling over motivation.

I learned that we need to get better about gun control, we need to ban the sale of assault weapons and make it as difficult to get guns as it unfortunately is right now to get mental help. We need to talk to our kids. We need to worry about video games and movies that makes violence so acceptable. We need to let men show their emotions, encourage their fluidity and stop their seemingly normal violent tendencies. We need to stop bullying and look at it as a legitimate concern not “kids will be kids.”

I learned all of this and the worst part is I am still left with questions. Because for every question I do answer another one pops up, and none of them will actually get answered.

I have my thoughts about helping but that’s not what this is about. I wrote Ekland for the questions and answers yes but as always I wrote it for me. To conquer that little bit of obsession and fascination. To reaffirm that sometimes it is about being at the wrong place at the wrong time. To show and preserve a part of our culture — one people don’t like to think exists and is ignored after it happens.

But it does exist doesn’t it?

Ekland answers some of the questions sure but it doesn’t live in our present time and it is that which makes it special.

It is truly a book about the cusp of the millennium and make no mistake about it that’s important. Ekland, Columbine, is the start of acceptable school violence and in this case it is more apparent with valid reasons, it transcends the wanting of fame and the social media craze a killer might know will follow his actions today. In this case Klebold and Harris wanted revenge on the school as a building and whole because that is what drove them to do what they did. Sometimes it is more than we would like to admit. And sometimes supporting free mental healthcare, not a movement for socialization (although we can come close) is looked at supporting a crazy mindset.

Is Ekland writing about the human condition? I certainly hope so. As always I will write detailed blogs about gun control and the infamy others now crave because of our multimedia generation. Again, this is not that.

I wrote Ekland to be first and foremost why someone would commit that type of crime as a teenager on a place that means something to them, a place seen as a threat — everything else is secondary.

I wrote Ekland because like most writers I was given a muse, a story outside of myself that I feel I was able to really tell, a point I mention in my author note I tried to do with as much authenticity and tact as I possibly could. I don’t think I could write Ekland as well today as I could months ago, despite becoming (hopefully) a better writer. Ekland was a story that scared the shit out of me.

And if you are scared of that story too, if it gets under your skin, it’s because you know that it’s real. And like my character said you should be scared.

These things happen and we need to fix them. Because the most valuable thing is at play here… our lives.