RSSValues? What values?
Nov 18
Everything about the “values” movement here in the US nicely summarized, by example, in one nice article. I couldn’t have dreamt this up myself, no matter how hard I tried.
Leave it to some moron in Spurger, Texas to come up with this. So apparently a school had a yearly tradition of the children changing roles for one day: girls ask boys to the dance, open doors for them, and dress like each other. Sounds innocent enough, no? Apparently it infringed on some parents right to enforce their strict anti-gay education on the innocent little mind. The parent lobbied the school, some group called Liberty Legal stepped in (which in an ironic use of their name is making people less free) and stopped the school from keeping this tradition.
Now, this would have been enough. By now I find this story sufficiently disgusting, think it shows how badly things are going in this country, etc.
The next part put it over the edge. What’s the only other thing aside from this fake and entirely maliscious “values” movement in the US that I could find more objectionable? Militarism. Guess what they had the kids dress up as instead? Army fatigues and boots. This is wrong, disgusting, and sends such a worse message to those children that it’s amazing.
Even if you were so absolutely homophobic that you thought this schools homecoming tradition had any kind of homosexual overtones whatsoever, is it better to teach children to kill people?
I know a large portion of the American population is homophobic, so will disagree with me, but personally I’d much rather be in country full of gay people (again, if you accept the ludicrous premise of that argument) than with a bunch of killers and murderers *ooops* I mean liberators.
Here’s the article:
Extreme homophobe
Nov 18, 2004 @ 16:55:21
Even if the boys are wearing dresses, as long as they are dancing with *girls* there is nothing gay about it. Why shouldn’t the girls have to hold a door open for a boy or pay for soda once in their life?
The real problem is the social stigma on guys wearing dresses. A woman can wear anything a guy can. But can a guy wear a dress in public without being ridiculed? No. Why not? Dresses are far more comfortable for guys anyway, our balls are free to hang out and flop around in the breeze.
The one parent who complained has confused the gay agenda with the transvestite agenda. As both the district attorney for Spurger, Tx and the leading lobbyist for dress wearing men everywhere, I believe the school must stand on its principles and allow these young boys their right to dress up in drag.
Nov 30, 2004 @ 11:42:17
Neil,
I agree entirely with what you’re saying except one part, which is that army fatigues and boots teach children to kill people. Never once in my life have I seen the military as a murder machine, but as a defense mechanism with killing as a somber and last resort. While current actions in Iraq dictate otherwise, I still hold true that in general all over the world people have militaries to keep their peace, like Switzerland.
I disagree with indentured military servitude and I wish we never had to have one — but it remains to be seen that some people have a natural tendency to cause destruction and prey on the innocent…like the schoolyard bully.
I have many friends in the military, and even one in the Canadian military currently serving on a peace mission in Bosnia…I do not view my friends as murderers and killers nor do they see themselves that way.
I don’t necessarily think the solution to this situation however, was to dress in military fatigues, but think more creatively as to how to get the message across that these protestors to a harmless tradition (one which has been going on since my grandmothers time! — sadie hawkins dances) does not encourage anything but gender equality.
Nov 30, 2004 @ 13:27:16
Sarah,
I agree that I’m taking the next logical step in that dressing up in Army fatigues turns people into killers. It is entirely true that dressing them up in fatigues desensitizes them to what people dressed in them often do.
About seeing the military as a killing machine… I’ve recently forced myself to try an experiment where I view and judge all military operations by their effects, not just their intentions. It has been an absolutely eye-opening experience. It takes on a whole different meaning when you think of the Iraq war not just as an effort to unseat Saddam, or “liberate” the people, but as the weapon that killed tens of thousands of people.
Does it change opinions to think like this? Sometimes it does. One thing I’m absolutely sure of is that there are hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq who would disagree with the war solely because they lost loved ones.
The US has become entirely too desensitized to the effects of war, primarily because there has never been one on US soil. The message the public receives is that there are this group of people, who willingly signed up to put their lives in danger, that they send off. Some stuff happens, and then a big portion of them come home. End of story. Most other countries in the world feel these effects directly. Like the German cities that were carpet bombed at the end of WW2. I’d be willing to bet anyone who survived that would be unwilling to sanction a war for any but the most dire of circumstances.
So, I’ve tried to give myself a little mission. Any time anyone talks about war I try to bring up the real human cost of the war. Not just the cost to the Westerners, but everyone.
Dec 03, 2004 @ 15:11:27
I definitely see your point, and your thoughts are certainly valid…I will correct one minor thing, the US has in fact seen war on their soil, just not in recent years.
I would posit that no one would disagree with you that the effects of war are absolutely devastating — and that anyone who has been involved in one would never ever believe that it was a ‘good’ or ‘uplifting’ experience.
But is it ever ok to go to war? At what point does war stop being good and start being evil? Or is it ever good? And when things occur in the world (and again, I am not talking about Iraq here…more like a WWII situation) should we step in?
It is ironic, if you’ve ever read the Geneva Convention, war among nations is outlawed. However, then it says, if you do engage in war, here are the rules….I’ll try and dig up something I wrote on that –it’s ludicrous how it is outlined. But my point is — no one has yet figured out war..because sometimes they feel it is necessary…even though we all wish it weren’t.
I think though, if you are solely looking at effects of things, then even drinking becomes an issue as one drink a day over a long period of time causes liver damage. Granted that is something we do to ourselves and not to other people — and also, I’m not trying to say that drinking is anywhere close to war-time activities. I know that effects of things are the result, but when bad things happen to me, but the intentions were good, it assuages much of my anger with result, as opposed to intentions being malevolent. But you’re right, effects can’t be ignored. Sorry I rambled — I’m on lack of sleep right now