Retirement Reflections — Mentoring Month

January is National Mentoring Month and The View devoted a show to this topic. I was struck by the variety of opinions on what a mentor is (or does). To me, a mentor was a regular presence in one’s life over an extended period. Others defined it as someone who was a singular influence or impetus to achieve, even though the mentor may not have known it. For all, mentors were inspirational, empowering.

Joy Behar credited Gloria Steinem with giving her the courage to pursue stand-up comedy, a tough field for women back in the seventies. Steinem was unaware that her words exhorting women to be their own person and have confidence in their abilities had been such an influence on Behar.

The other co-hosts had more traditional mentors, but the clips of celebrities showed them thanking everyone from wives who pushed them to succeed to agents who stood by them early in their careers. I've decided there are several types of mentoring.

The most familiar I will call formative. A formative mentor helps set you on a path to achieve greatness, or at least to achieve your goals, no matter how modest. To do this, a formative mentor devotes a considerable amount of time and energy to molding you. He remains a presence in your life over many years.

Similar, but generally for shorter periods, are transitional mentors. They help guide you through challenging life passages—high school, college, attempts to stop smoking or to get out of a bad relationship, for example. Over time, a transitional mentor may evolve into a formative one.

Next are the exemplars. Some people call them idols or heroes. By whatever name, they serve as examples of how to lead your life, how to achieve your goals. An exemplar may not know how many people she’s mentored, but she is very likely aware that she’s setting an example. We all can—and should—be exemplars.

Finally, there is the reflective mentor. By that I mean we may not realize the person served as a mentor at the time it’s happening. Upon reflection, often years or decades later, you recognize their influence on your life. They’re very likely unaware of the impact they’ve had on you.

As I look back, I can’t say I ever had a traditional, or formative, mentor. I have long-time friends who’ve always encouraged me and I’m grateful for them. But I never had one person there over the years for me to go to for advice. No one who propped me up, pointed me in the right direction and gave me a gentle push when I might have needed it. Mostly I found my way by trial and error, by stumbling into things that made sense, that worked. Or seemed to at the time.

I’ve been a “closet” writer for decades. When I worked at a large corporation in Manhattan, I regaled my co-workers with bogus intra-office memos. Toward the end of my 17-year career there, I collected them into a book, added material and gave it a working title of “A Neophyte’s Guide to Corporate Survival.”

The father of one of my peers was with Random House, and she offered to have him critique my manuscript. His comments were constructive. The product in its current form was neither fish nor foul. If it was intended to be helpful, it needed more meat. If meant to be funny (which it was), it needed to be edgier. The net of his advice was to be outrageous if I wanted to be a published humorist.

I took this to heart. When I was “downsized” a few years later, I wrote an opinion column itemizing what I saved by no longer commuting. My “fuzzy math” concluded that I was making money by not working. The piece was published in the Sunday New York Times. I was paid $75 and I was over the moon.

A year later, the Times published my second, even more outrageous column, on the garbage crisis. A few years after that, Marketing News ran two of my crazier pieces. Then followed close to two decades with little time to write.

One of the reasons I retired was to provide that time. I keep the advice of that Random House executive in mind, pushing my humor to the edge of reasonableness. Occasionally I write more serious, wistful pieces, like today’s post. But what I consider my signature style is my humor. I think it’s time to contact my former colleague and ask her to pass on my thanks to her father. And maybe even to become a mentor myself.

In recognition of National Mentoring Month, thank a mentor and become a mentor. Retirement is a great time to start!

Retirement Variations — Tebowing for Retirees

Coverage of Tim Tebow praying on bended knee, after scoring a touchdown or completing a “Hail Mary” pass, has been inescapable. For those scarce few who are unfamiliar with “Tebowing,” his position is a cross between Rodin’s “The Thinker” and Friberg’s Washington praying in the snow at Valley Forge.

Now that the Denver Broncos have been knocked out of the AFC playoffs, Tebow and his pose are disappearing from the media. I’m here to help those suffering from Tebow withdrawal. Retirees have several poses that we strike almost daily that are worthy of as much media attention as “Tebowing.” Perhaps more.

First and most important is “Elbowing.” This is the pose we strike when we’re in a crowded area and we can tell that the younger folk around expect to steamroller past us. You can almost see the thought balloon over their heads: “Retiree. Unstable on her feet. Not much energy left. I can just push by her and get ahead in line.” As if.

This is when we strike one of our most effective poses. Elbows sharply bent, hands in fists, positioned at chest height for maximum angularity. We look like we’re about to do the chicken dance, which disarms the young’uns, so they’re off guard for what’s coming. This is not the same position as akimbo (hands on hips). Try them both and you’ll see how much more effective elbowing will be for crowd control. And retribution.

The second retiree pose is the aptly-named “Get Going.” This is the one we fall into as we get out of bed. When we place our feet on the floor, we’re bent over slightly (or more than slightly) at the waist. As we stand up (or try to), the waist bend remains for several minutes, until we overcome our inertia and finally get going. Stiff, arthritic knees make it even harder to get going, so there’s a motion component as well. Or more precisely, a lack-of-motion component.

One of the more subtle poses favored by retirees is the “Tilt and Cup,” wherein the head is held sideways and tilted back slightly, with hand cupped at the back of the ear. This pushes the ear forward, so sounds bounce off the inside of the hand into the ear canal. This pose is seen most often in crowds of retirees, when people are all talking at once and the decibel level is high. A group “Tilt and Cup” can look like a flash mob to those who aren’t close to retirement, making them think we’re cool.

Some folks mistake the “What For” for the ”Tilt and Cup,” but it’s a distinct retiree stance. We use it when we head from one room to another for a purpose that we've lost sight of by the time we get there. We stop, tilt our head, and rub our chin thoughtfully, as though it’s a magic lamp that can summon the Memory Genie.

Occasionally, we try to summon the genie by rubbing one of our temples. From behind, it can appear that we’re rubbing our ear, which is probably how the confusion with the “Tilt and Cup” came about. If the “What For” pose is struck before we reach our destination, it’s referred to as the “Where To.” If you’re already retired, you know why.

The “Teeter-Totter” is not as much a pose as a method of locomotion. You’ll recognize it by the almost-imperceptible shifting from foot to foot, with virtually no forward progress. As we transition into retirement, we somehow get the idea that moving side to side is a better way to get from here to there than moving directly forward. No one seems able to explain this, but we see it all the time.

The “Teeter-Totter” is often paired with the “Chair Crane,” which is an actual pose, though barely. Since forward t-t motion is awkward, the person teetering often grabs hold of the arm or back of a nearby chair with one hand. This is intended to prevent tottering into something or someone en route. The t-t-er then lifts the opposite foot as he takes the “Chair Crane” stance ever so briefly, but often multiple times, as he progresses from point A to point B.

Finally, I present the  quintessential retiree pose—the “LayZbo.” Here’s how it works. Plop yourself into a recliner. Tilt the chair back and clasp your hands behind your head. Put your feet up on the footrest or matching hassock. You’re now doing the “LayZbo,” one of the great joys of retirement.

Tim Tebow, eat your heart out.

Retirement Wish List — Discussion Shows for Retirees

Some of the most popular TV fare are discussion shows with panels of regulars. The quintessential example and my favorite is ABC’s The View. For those living in a man cave—oops! my bad (banned phrase in 2012)—under a rock, The View has five female co-hosts of varying demographics, backgrounds and, appropriately, points of View.

CBS developed a competing but less successful show, The Talk. They must have thought their title would deliver women who meant to tune in The View but got confused. As if. Meanwhile, ABC, pumped by its continued good ratings and CBS’s less than stellar entry, concluded they are simply better at this format. They expanded from women’s issues into The Chew, about—you guessed it—food.

Notice that discussion shows all have four letter titles. That includes The Five, Fox’s replacement for Glenn Beck when he bailed on them. The Five, with a rotating panel of—you guessed it again, five—Fox personalities, was created as a stop-gap. When it was still gapping nicely without stop after three months, it became permanent.

As I mulled this over, I decided there’s an opportunity for discussion shows for retirees. The network that hops on this should develop one version for women and another for men, for two key reasons. First, with all the flirting and fawning, there’d be too much sexual tension in a co-ed group. You couldn’t have serious conversations. Second, the ideal panel size seems to be five. So a co-ed panel would have an uneven number of members of each sex—never a good idea. (Remember Spin the Bottle?)

I have suggestions for the composition of these panels to get the same level of head-butting (or butt-heading?) as on The View. I’ve worked hard to get a range of ages and points of view and to provide diversity. It wasn’t easy. Just try to find an older conservative female celebrity. Or an older black one, for that matter; most of those even close to retirement are already on a discussion show.

For the women’s panel, Betty White is a must. She’s hot (in Cleveland) now, is opinionated and funny, and has demonstrated her chops in female-group programming. Another good choice is Jane Fonda, who has just put out exercise DVD’s for seniors. She’s also opinionated, though not funny, but we’ve got that covered with Betty. Jane should come cheap; she’ll want to push her DVD’s at least until her leotard wears out. (She still has that striped one from her original workout video.)

I’d also include The Brady Bunch mom, Florence Henderson; her RLTV cable show is obscure enough to be a non-issue. Wikipedia claims she supports a Catholic charity and, out of respect, refused to dress in a nun's habit for a comedy skit. That makes her quasi-conservative compared to other celebrities, even if she did get crabs from NYC Mayor John Lindsay when she had an adulterous affair with him in the sixties.

Faye Wattleton would be a great panel member. She’s known for speaking out on controversial topics, plus she provides that sought after diversity. Candice Bergen rounds out my choices. She’s one of the contributors to the women’s website WowOWow.com. Her pregnant-out-of-wedlock Murphy Brown character could debate Planned Grandparenthood with Faye. Can't wait.

Moving on to the candidates for the men’s show, we have lots of choices, several of whom have had talk shows of their own. We think they can be lured into joining our discussion group, now that they are in or are approaching their own retirement.

Two obvious ones that will add excitement, controversy and color are Jerry Springer and Larry King. For color of a different sort, we’ll pull in Bill Cosby. Less obvious, but faces that are familiar on the late night circuit, are Terry Bradshaw and Ben Stein. Bradshaw is borderline manic and Stein can be depressive. Talk about stirring the pot. Stein has the added advantage of offering a conservative voice.

Once a month, we’ll bring the two panels together on a current hot topic that is highly polarizing. That should really liven up the discussions. Betty White going at it with Larry King over clip-on vs. button-on suspenders! Florence Henderson taking on fellow Dancing with the Stars alum Jerry Springer on whether the rumba can be adapted for pole dancing! Talk about sexual tension…

The only thing left to do is come up with a four-letter name for these suckers. The Perk is a possibility, but isn't it too Central to the Friends TV show? Perhaps The Brew; that can have several meanings. We’ll tell the men it’s short for Brewski.

Oh, yes. These shows are destined for critical acclaim. I think I’ve found my next career: TV programming. Sta-a-ay tuned!

Retirement Guidelines — Words Banned in 2012

Lake Superior University in Michigan just issued its annual list of banned words. Words and phrases that qualify are overused, misused, useless or otherwise annoying—ones that make us grind our teeth so hard that the fillings vibrate.

This year’s dirty dozen includes such gems as “baby bump,” “the new normal,” “amazing,” “man cave,” and “shared sacrifice.” As a service to my fellow retirees, I’ve gathered a similar collection of ne’er-do-wells to be banned from publications targeted at us.

While it’s not likely anyone would send retirees tips on how to deal with our baby bumps, I would be happy if I never saw the words “muffin top” or “breadbasket” again. I’d be even happier if I never saw my own muffin top again. While we’re on the topic of muffins and bread, let’s banish “donut hole.” No one understands how that actually works and I’ve about worn it out in my blog posts.

I’d keep “bread box,” though, since it’s a useful term of size comparison. “Bigger than a microwave” just doesn’t have the same ring to it. I would, however, suggest tossing “lock box.” It, too, has served its purpose for my blogging needs. Of course, if Al Gore were to reappear on the political horizon, I might have a change of heart.

A better candidate for banishment than “the new normal” is “the new 50,” as in: “60 is the new 50.” Enough already; 60 is not the new 50. It can’t be, because 66 is the old 65, and pretty soon 67 will be the old 66. If you’re inclined to quibble over this, check out the progression in the FRA (Full Retirement Age) over recent years.

Moving on, I’d hang on to “amazing” and drop “age appropriate” instead. All this blather about what behavior is “age appropriate” for retirees flies in the face of the amazing condition that many retirees are in. Not to mention their energetic interest in politics, fashion, pop culture and—so it appears per a recent study of older women—sex.

Since I now have your attention, I direct you to a report in the American Journal of Medicine on research that followed more than 800 California women over the course of 40 years. (And you know what they say about West Coast girls…) Actually, the study doesn’t say senior women have a stronger interest in sex; rather that the sex is more satisfying when they get older. So much for “age appropriate.”

I digress. This post is not about sex; it’s about language. Overused, misused, useless or annoying language. To that end, I have no bone to pick with banning “man cave;” it sounds so, well… prehistoric. But I’d also like to get rid of any and all forms of “staging,” as in: “My real estate agent arranged for a stager to remove every hint of personality from our cave before we put it on the market so we can downsize.”

While I’d love to eliminate “downsizing,” it will be at least a decade before the baby boom of incoming retirees will have downsized their need for that term. Relative to its role in retirement planning, it’s not even close to being overused. Corporations seem to have come to a different conclusion, however, preferring the more euphemistic “rightsizing.” Yeah, right.

Speaking of not downsizing, “extended family” is another phrase that has outlived its usefulness. An “extended family” now has so many variations and interpretations that the phrase no longer has a reliable meaning. Better to be more specific, using “echo boomer” or “multi-generational” or “sandwiched” family and bid farewell to “extended.”

I haven’t decided yet how I feel about giving up “shared sacrifice.” I’m conflicted about how it applies to my husband and me. I’m good if it means that when one of us cooks, the other does the dishes. Now that I’m retired and watching our spending, I  “sacrifice” by getting my hair cut every six weeks instead of five. Best I can tell, my husband gets his cut about twice a year. If he shared my schedule-lengthening, we’d need to get him a man-cave. Not good.

Until I figure out how we can actually share sacrifices, I’d like to hang onto that phrase for at least another year. If I have to give up some other phrase in exchange, they can have “tighten your belt.” At this point in our lives, loosening our belts is far more useful. It draws less attention to our breadbaskets and muffin tops. Neither of which shall we speak of again.