With the current Imus thing in the news it's time again to point fingers of accusation. Buckle up, it's a long blog.
We each belong to any number of demographic groups at a given time. One person may be 63, a woman, have white skin, and regularly attends the local bingo games at the catholic church. Another may be a male black man in his 20s who attends the local community college. Another might be a hispanic woman in her 30s raising 2 children, married to an asian man, and belongs to the local wiccan coven. Still another may be an overweight hermaphrodite with 11 fingers, 62 tattoos, 14 cats, 2 goats, a ferrari, belongs to the progressive party, shops at walmart, holds a blackbelt in judo, eats garlic and peanut butter sandwiches and helps out down at the local soup kitchen.
If any one of us belongs to a particular demographic, we can feel free to poke fun at that demographic using stereotypes or otherwise. After all, if I'm one of them, then it's self-deprecating humor. It's ok. But if someone from outside my group so much as even mentions that I belong to the group I'm in, they deserve to be pilloried and then shunned.
Today, I was discussing this with a friend at work. He then called me an "idiot", for which my knee jerk reaction was to turn and start to hurl back a return volley. But then it occurred to me: "Wait it's ok. He's an idiot too!"
Is this the kind of world we want? A populace so hyper-aware of their "diversity" that they take offence at the slightest perceived "insensitivity" of another?
Lets take a look at what people say within their own demographic groups. Without going to too much trouble you can find examples of people who use the very words (and worse), that if used from outside their group, would get them riled up and frothing at the mouth. Take any racial slur. Use one referring to your own demographic and you are safe. Use one out of your own demographic and it is wrong.
I ask this: why isn't always wrong? Why isn't it always offensive? Conversely, if it is ok to use a particular word to describe people within your group, why can't another group use it to describe your group? Where is the outrage when these same words are used and glorified in music and stand-up comedy? Consider for a moment why some people are accused of being a traitor to their group.
We humans have the coinciding need to be accepted and to be unique. We want to feel like we belong. To feel like people like us. Yet we don't want to be exactly like the next guy. Many of us will attempt to fulfill both these needs by consciously joining what we consider to be an atypical group. Most of us, when we rebel against the perceived norms of society, we want to belong to a group with similar ideas, dress, language, etc. Many people actually enjoy the feeling they get when they think people are looking down on them. Especially if they can commiserate with their group. In a way, it makes them feel superior to others.
In today's US culture, it is ridiculous to think that there may be a majority of people in one demographic who has it out for any other group. "The Man" does not exist. Not in the form of a rich, fat, white, cigar smoking suit behind a desk plotting to hold down your group.
If your group is being held down, it is likely by those people who are professing to help you. Why do you need help? Is life unfair for you? Get over it, life is unfair for all of us. Whoever told you life is fair was lying. The examples of people overcoming the utter crap that life handed them are so numerous that it ceases to be anecdotal, and becomes demonstrative of what can be accomplished if one is willing to work hard and stop whining about the roadblocks put in their way.
When it comes to race, the US is no different than many other countries out there. We have a lot of people living here who belong to a lot of different ethnic groups. There is a lot of history involved with how we were peopled. Many of us have ancestors who chose to come to this country hundreds of years ago. Many of us are only one or two generations living here. Others had ancestors who were forced to come here against their will. Still others' ancestors came here thousands of years ago thus gaining them the designation "native". (This should probably be the subject of another blog: just how long do you ancestors have to have lived in a place to be bestowed the title 'native'? Mine have been here for 350+ years, but I digress.)
So here we are, living on land that was conquered, occupied, bought, swindled, annexed, or otherwise taken. We are a people who were considered indigenous, colonists, slaves, immigrants or aliens (dang Canadians taking over). As a whole, we get along better than most countries. As individuals we have problems with each other. But are those problems race based? I don't buy it. People would find a reason to be irritated with their neighbor no matter what color, creed, sex, political party they are, or what jeans they wear.
What is racism? The dictionary says this:
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
How many people that you know fall within the first definition? Not many? Think again. There are millions who subscribe wholeheartedly to the first half of that sentence. Are you aware of government laws mandating we look at the color of someone's skin? In order to determine whether discrimination is going on, we must discriminate. In order to make up for prejudice, we must be prejudicial. In order to make things more fair we must be unfair to some.
I suspect that the most racist people in America are those who keep pointing the finger at others. The media is in the business of making money. It is in their best interest to generate news where there is none. The MSM is one of the biggest culprits when it comes to inciting racial disharmony. Every time someone who is not a 20 something white male accomplishes something, there has to be a story about the "first _______-American to become a _________".
If the media keeps recognizing "achievements" of people in light of their demographic group: their race, color, sex, religion, orientation, etc. then how is the public ever to accept people for the content of their character?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment