ATLmalcontent

the inequity of legos

A study was conducted, and Legos were subsequently banned.

When the children discovered the decimated Legotown, they reacted with shock and grief. Children moaned and fell to their knees to inspect the damage; many were near tears. The builders were devastated, and the other children were deeply sympathetic. We gathered as a full group to talk about what had happened; at one point in the conversation, Kendra suggested a big cleanup of the loose Legos on the floor. The Legotown builders were fierce in their opposition. They explained that particular children "owned" those pieces and it would be unfair to put them back in the bins where other children might use them. As we talked, the issues of ownership and power that had been hidden became explicit to the whole group.

We met as a teaching staff later that day. We saw the decimation of Lego-town as an opportunity to launch a critical evaluation of Legotown and the inequities of private ownership and hierarchical authority on which it was founded. Our intention was to promote a contrasting set of values: collectivity, collaboration, resource-sharing, and full democratic participation. We knew that the examination would have the most impact if it was based in engaged exploration and reflection rather than in lots of talking. We didn't want simply to step in as teachers with a new set of rules about how the children could use Legos, exchanging one set of authoritarian rules with another. Ann suggested removing the Legos from the classroom. This bold decision would demonstrate our discomfort with the issues we saw at play in Legotown. And it posed a challenge to the children: How might we create a "community of fairness" about Legos?

These educators seem more focused on enforcing fairness (in an unfair world) than encouraging creativity, a depressing cliche within academia.

I Am a Racist

So says a "consciousness-raising program" at the University of Delaware used to train resident assistants:

A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e. people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture, or sexuality.

As opposed to Merriam-Webster, which defines racism as a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Of course no one is born a bigot. Racism is learned, and programs like the one at UD -- thankfully terminated -- will do nothing but create more intolerance, not less.

Another Right-Wing Conspirator Unmasked

My friend Andisheh from Creative Loafing is doubly cursed. Grasping irony is bad enough -- must he also have a sense of humor?

Andy's come under fire from a humorless literalist for including a prominent anti-war activist in his rundown of Atlanta's 11 Least Influential People.

Frankly, I think you and your publication owe Bobbie Paul an apology. Not only did you list her in a fool's gallery, but you did it in the context of an action that constitutes about 1% of her contribution to the progressive community.

Do you have a clue who this woman is, or know anything about WAND?

Why don't we just round out the list and put you as number 12? We could characterize you as the guy who likes to play writer.

You're fucked now, Wolfowitz, er, Andy. The "progressive community" don't play.

Of course he wasn't mocking Paul. Inclusion on the list is something of an honor.

But that doesn't matter to the terminally aggrieved likes of MelGX:

By the way, most of Bobbie's people are letter writers. By Monday, your box should be full.

(I wish I had "people." Write letters on my behalf, you!) 

Mel reminds me of those who bitch whenever TIME magazine names someone like Hitler "Man (Person, Person, sorry, I meant Person) of the Year." Left or right, the professionally indignant are all the same.

Nobody Likes a Skinny Santa

Santa told to slim down for Christmas to 'set a good example'

This is not a joke.

Bluewater shopping centre in Greenhithe, Kent, has even gone one step further and set-up a Santa boot camp.

Fiona Campbell-Reilly, spokeswoman at the shopping centre, said: "Santa has been around for years, but society has changed and our Santa needs to reflect this.

"Bluewater's Santa Boot Camp is getting Santa in shape and setting a good example to children who idolise him.

"He will still be the same lovable jolly man, but will be fitter and healthier."

Has she never seen "Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer," when Mrs. Claus implores her husband to bulk up?

"Eat, Papa, eat. Nobody likes a skinny Santa."

Turns out that exchange has been reworded to mollify PC bullies. According to John Aravosis, a number of sites complained that the line promoted bulimia.

Coming soon: a black, bisexual Easter Bunny. I mean, a black, bisexual Spring Bunny. 

Gay bullies

Offend a homosexual in the UK and you might well end up in jail for seven years.

The legislation - similar to laws already in force outlawing persecution on religious or racial grounds - will make criminals of those who express their views in ways that could lead to the bullying or harassment of gays.

The maximum sentence is longer than the average of around five years handed to rapists.

You read that correctly. Speech crimes will be judged more harshly than sexual assaults.

This is why I so vehemently oppose the Petty Queer Establishment; hate crime legislation is the first step. Criminalizing "hate speech" is next. While some within the gay movement would like to make us the most protected class, I'd rather prove we can handle a slur without demanding imprisonment. We are not all whiny, self-absorbed little queens.

The gay pressure group Stonewall said those who disapprove of homosexuals would have nothing to fear from the law if they express their views in a manner that is "temperate" and "polite".

And who defines what is temperate and polite? The PC thugs within the PQE? This post alone might land me in the hoosegow.

If there are any gays or lesbians reading this who care to defend such a law, please comment. I dare you.

Arrested for ignorance?

I have no tolerance for bigots, nor do I tolerate governments who detain people for what they say or think.

Darren Hayes, lead singer of maudlin pop band Savage Garden, was alleged to have made racist comments recently. If true, that makes him an asshole. But London police have made him a martyr, at least in my eyes, after arresting Hayes for "racially abusing" a waiter at a Thai restaurant. No physical contact was alleged.

So I'm to understand that the UK has ordered its cops to arrest the insensitive? Anyone else find this chilling?

Obviously she's never been to a gay bar

Never mind the frightful implications of a municipality banning words -- even allegedly offensive ones. The cluelessness of New York City Councilwoman Darlene Mealy is almost as alarming:

The New York City Council, which drew national headlines when it passed a symbolic citywide ban earlier this year on the use of the so-called n-word, has turned its linguistic (and legislative) lance toward a different slur: bitch.

The term is hateful and deeply sexist, said Councilwoman Darlene Mealy of Brooklyn, who has introduced a measure against the word, saying it creates “a paradigm of shame and indignity” for all women.

What about the women who are, in fact, bitches? (Must we now refer to them as unpleasant shrews?) And what about the womyn who've proudly appropriated the term?

Plenty of men are also thusly labeled in today's culture. And so, endearingly, is pretty much every homosexual. It's dropped casually by both genders, blacks and whites, straights and (especially) gays. Few use it to denigrate women, and those who do typically face repercussions, such as a slap in the face or a knee to the groin. No victims here.

But we're all victimized when the overly sensitive -- and professionally indignant -- attain power. Witness Mealy's mealy mouthed defense of her measure:

"They buried the n-word, but what about the other words that really affect women, such as ‘b,’ and ‘ho’? That’s a vile attack on our womanhood."

What a bitch!

"Many colors in the homo rainbow"

And here I thought GLBT was too inclusive a term (no offense to my tranny brothers, sisters and undecideds, but I think our battles should be waged separately).

Now comes word the University of Michigan Office of Lesbian, Gay Bisexual and Transgender Affairs is changing its name because some people felt left out:

*The letters LGBT, as representative of the identities lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender, are no longer inclusive of the diversity of the community. Changing trends in identification tell us that the community of LGBT people go by any number of terms, including Queer. The complexity of these labels is also a product of a younger generation of LGBT youth abandoning "traditional" labeling in favor of more fluid identities.

*The term "Transgender" is problematic in itself, as many consider transgender to mean transsexual when the term is intended to be an "umbrella term" for anyone who transgresses the boundaries of the gender binary.

*The current Office name does not reflect the work that we do for and with Allies.

What about closet cases? Don't the Ryan Seacrests of the world deserve representation? And what about us self-loathing homos?

Most grating, as Dan Savage points out, is the amount of time invested into the name-changing process. Two years of dithering and still no decision; one isn't expected until December. In the meantime:

• Summer, 2007-Fall 2007 - we will meet with stakeholders on campus including, Women's Studies, Institute for Research on Women and Gender, School of Social Work, Office of Institutional Equity
• Fall, 2007 - 3 forums will be held for ideas and feedback about and for name change with U of M community members
• Fall, 2007 - we meet specifically with the LGBT Caucus of the Students of Color of Rackham
• Fall, 2007 - Will identify budget and infrastructure implications

And there's more. Next Spring they'll hold a contest for a new logo.

Further proof that it's best to go it alone, independent of groups that claim to represent your race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation. Organizations that promote group identity -- like the Michigan LBGTQSCCetc. -- accomplish little, save for occasional indignation rallys.

Look at the NAACP -- once a relevant organization, the civil rights coaliton is so desperate for attention that it's come to the defense of Michael Vick. And this helps African-Americans how?

Tolerance-free zone

Dubious source, but free speech advocates should be appalled. This puts the tolerance crowd in line with the Muslims protesting against Salman Rushdie's knighthood.

More on this later.

*According to a trusted contact, protests are allowed within Piedmont Park during Pride (though the video makes me wonder). I plan to find out for myself tomorrow.

Reclaiming the "L word"

Two days ago I argued that the left should cleave to the epithet 'liberal', on account of the importance of the values liberalism has stood for historically. I did not then enter the reservation that I will enter now: which is that if the word is sometimes held in low esteem, part of the reason for this is the kind of 'liberalism' that will lose sight of the need to defend some crucial liberal value in the light of obfuscating considerations. You may be opposed to the honours system, or you may think that Rushdie wasn't worth a knighthood for literary or personal reasons; but ambiguity about how much respect is owed to the outrage over the award there should not be. None is.

Norm Geras refers to British author Will Self and academic Marcel Berlins, each of whom has apparently concluded that Muslim outrage transcends recognition of artistic valor (regardless of what one thinks of legitimizing the monarchy). Many "liberals" would agree. Call 'em what they really are: cowards. You know, the "C word."