I'm sure you've seen the news this week. It's been all over the place, as if we had nothing better to worry about this week. Or maybe we just want to escape whatever roller coaster the stock market is sending us on?
Yes, people are getting up in arms about Bert and Ernie. Sure, quite a few of us grew up singing about our rubber duckies, but I guess we can't just leave it alone. Bert and Ernie are examples for children these days, as they always have been, and it appears we are concerned about what that example might be.
One might think, given my hefty support of same-gender loving marriage, that I would be in full support of the idea of a wedding for Bert and Ernie. But they'd be quite wrong.
It's not that I'm opposed to the idea of them getting married. Sure, if that's who they are, then go for it. But is that who they are? The good folks at Sesame Street keep telling us that Bert and Ernie aren't gay, and are instead best friends and roommates. I don't think they were created as gay characters, and if they weren't then, why are they now?
In an age where we are fighting for a revolution in gender identity, is it fair for us to project our own ideas of who somebody is or isn't onto their lived experience absent their own input? I understand they are puppets (as the folks at Sesame Street are also keen to point out) and subject to whatever character traits and thoughts created for them by human writers, but I know I didn't think about that when I was growing up. I knew of Bert and Ernie as people that are friendly with each other, because that's what they are portrayed as. Anything else added to that is our own projection of what we want to see, for better or for worse.
Should Sesame Street have gay, married characters? Well, I think an example of all forms of love, as well as an example of the different areas of gender identity would be good for an educational program to show, especially for those that might not get it in any other context. But that's a different argument. For us to decide that Bert and Ernie are gay and should be married is no better than us deciding who is gay based on how they dress, the people they hang out with, or how they speak. Same goes for gender identity. It is not for us to project our own desires and perceptions on other people. That's how we end up with stereotyping and discrimination.
So if we want to petition Sesame Street to address gender and sexual orientation topics in an educational and positive way, I'm in. But if we want to petition Sesame Street to address our own ideas of what people (or in this case, puppets) should do without respecting who they are, then I'm out. I'll have fun with Bert and Ernie over bananas and bath time:
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
My Surreal Sunday
It was unexpected. By that, I mean, having never been punched in the face before, I didn't recognize what was happening until after it happened. It was a touch past surreal. Maybe next time I'll know I should duck.
I have no idea how the day ended up this way. The plan: head to Menlo Park Presbyterian Church for morning service, chill out in the area for a bunch of hours, and then head back to the church for the 7 PM young adult service. As part of my day hanging around, I thought a movie would be a good time killer, so I found a big theater, drove over there after the service got out around noon, parked the car, and went looking for some food.
Ah, Redwood City, a fine downtown area indeed, if not a tad on the ritzy side. As I rounded a corner towards the "food court" area next to the theater, I passed a man on the sidewalk that seemed to give me a strange look. So it goes sometimes, I thought, and continued on. About halfway down the street, as I was checking out the many food options, I realized the man that gave me a strange look was following me, and that's when he approached me.
We had a short conversation about what I was doing and what my plans were, and I had a sense that something strange was going on. We walked into the Chipotle together, as I figured burritos were a good choice of food. Plus, it was a public establishment that might discourage any untoward action. Or so I thought. I stood in line, and he asked me if I knew what I wanted. I told him I was still figuring it out, all the while trying to figure out how to separate myself from him, for the hair on the back of my neck grew straighter by the second.
That's when I didn't recognize his fist coming at me. Like so often said, it was in slow motion. Rather than reacting, I stood confused, trying to figure out what he was doing. That was sorted out pretty quickly when he hit me, but I was still confused: why would someone want to hit me, much less someone I don't know?
I backed away with my hands in front of me, ready to try to ward of the next blow that never came. At first the ladies at the counter implored us to take it outside, not wanting violence in their fine eatery. I agreed vociferously, quickly winning them over with my consistent backing and asking for them to call the police. The man was still saying things to me, but I wasn't paying too much attention to that so much as his location and my places of safe harbor. After the ladies at the counter confirmed they were calling the police, the man left and walked down the street in a pretty normal manner.
One punch. That was it. It's hard for me to call one punch an assault, but that's where the police were, so I wasn't going to argue. Since they had him in custody due to some fast and fantastic police work, I was asked if I wanted to press charges. It took me a while to decide. All I could think about was compassion and love, and how it's so hard to love those who hate you, but that doesn't get you off the hook. So I was leaning towards no, but I then I thought some more.
I'd had some time to reflect on what happened as I waited for the police to show up, and I ran everything over in my head. I can't remember the specifics of what he was saying, but the general gist I was picking up was he didn't like me for some reason, and thought what I was doing was wrong. I don't know what that's a reference to, since I had never seen this man before in my life, and we knew nothing of each other. He didn't want my money, and he never said anything about how I might have wronged him. I was clearly targeted by him, so a quick inventory of myself told me he thought I was gay. Either that, or he didn't like my orange shirt? I still wear my rainbow bracelet every day to show my support for the LGBTQ population, and that was the only thing I could think of that might have caught his attention.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it felt to me like a hate crime. In the end, that's why I decided to press charges. If he was disturbed, or high, or I had unknowingly wronged him, I might have let it pass and let go, but there was that nagging feeling in the back of my head that there was something else to it. If he had hit me because I was gay, even if it was only a slim possibility, I couldn't let it pass. How could I look my friends or family in the eye after fighting against things like that for so long, and then when the opportunity came upon me, just letting it slide? How is that justice?
But maybe I'm just projecting an idea to understand these strange events. It's easier to think that someone won't decide today that you're the one to be violent towards. It's easier to think that everyone acts in a rational way, and that one need only show a person the "right" way to change a course of action. It's easier to think that everything has a simple reason behind it, and that if we understand that reason, if in some way it all makes sense to us, then it just gets better. But it's not easy. Even if I can fully convince myself of his possible ugly intentions, I still don't see a way to clearing up the confusion I can't shake. My mind works so hard to try to understand everything I can encounter, and it sure is working overdrive on this one, but I'm no closer to understanding now than I was as it was happening.
I never was angry at the man, and I'm still not. Whatever his reasons were, in the end he needed some kind of help, and perhaps his arrest will point him towards that help. Really, I felt sad for him. I felt sad for all the points in his life that led him to the one of violence with me. I felt sad for how his life may be so different now that he hit me. I felt sad that he didn't even see the wrong in what he had done, with they way in which he casually walked away revealing so much.
The police officer told me I would most likely never see him again, and I suppose I'm fine with that. But part of me wishes I could see him again, perhaps just in passing, just to say that I pray peace finds his life to free him from whatever led him to hit me, and that I forgive him.
I have no idea how the day ended up this way. The plan: head to Menlo Park Presbyterian Church for morning service, chill out in the area for a bunch of hours, and then head back to the church for the 7 PM young adult service. As part of my day hanging around, I thought a movie would be a good time killer, so I found a big theater, drove over there after the service got out around noon, parked the car, and went looking for some food.
Ah, Redwood City, a fine downtown area indeed, if not a tad on the ritzy side. As I rounded a corner towards the "food court" area next to the theater, I passed a man on the sidewalk that seemed to give me a strange look. So it goes sometimes, I thought, and continued on. About halfway down the street, as I was checking out the many food options, I realized the man that gave me a strange look was following me, and that's when he approached me.
We had a short conversation about what I was doing and what my plans were, and I had a sense that something strange was going on. We walked into the Chipotle together, as I figured burritos were a good choice of food. Plus, it was a public establishment that might discourage any untoward action. Or so I thought. I stood in line, and he asked me if I knew what I wanted. I told him I was still figuring it out, all the while trying to figure out how to separate myself from him, for the hair on the back of my neck grew straighter by the second.
That's when I didn't recognize his fist coming at me. Like so often said, it was in slow motion. Rather than reacting, I stood confused, trying to figure out what he was doing. That was sorted out pretty quickly when he hit me, but I was still confused: why would someone want to hit me, much less someone I don't know?
I backed away with my hands in front of me, ready to try to ward of the next blow that never came. At first the ladies at the counter implored us to take it outside, not wanting violence in their fine eatery. I agreed vociferously, quickly winning them over with my consistent backing and asking for them to call the police. The man was still saying things to me, but I wasn't paying too much attention to that so much as his location and my places of safe harbor. After the ladies at the counter confirmed they were calling the police, the man left and walked down the street in a pretty normal manner.
One punch. That was it. It's hard for me to call one punch an assault, but that's where the police were, so I wasn't going to argue. Since they had him in custody due to some fast and fantastic police work, I was asked if I wanted to press charges. It took me a while to decide. All I could think about was compassion and love, and how it's so hard to love those who hate you, but that doesn't get you off the hook. So I was leaning towards no, but I then I thought some more.
I'd had some time to reflect on what happened as I waited for the police to show up, and I ran everything over in my head. I can't remember the specifics of what he was saying, but the general gist I was picking up was he didn't like me for some reason, and thought what I was doing was wrong. I don't know what that's a reference to, since I had never seen this man before in my life, and we knew nothing of each other. He didn't want my money, and he never said anything about how I might have wronged him. I was clearly targeted by him, so a quick inventory of myself told me he thought I was gay. Either that, or he didn't like my orange shirt? I still wear my rainbow bracelet every day to show my support for the LGBTQ population, and that was the only thing I could think of that might have caught his attention.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it felt to me like a hate crime. In the end, that's why I decided to press charges. If he was disturbed, or high, or I had unknowingly wronged him, I might have let it pass and let go, but there was that nagging feeling in the back of my head that there was something else to it. If he had hit me because I was gay, even if it was only a slim possibility, I couldn't let it pass. How could I look my friends or family in the eye after fighting against things like that for so long, and then when the opportunity came upon me, just letting it slide? How is that justice?
But maybe I'm just projecting an idea to understand these strange events. It's easier to think that someone won't decide today that you're the one to be violent towards. It's easier to think that everyone acts in a rational way, and that one need only show a person the "right" way to change a course of action. It's easier to think that everything has a simple reason behind it, and that if we understand that reason, if in some way it all makes sense to us, then it just gets better. But it's not easy. Even if I can fully convince myself of his possible ugly intentions, I still don't see a way to clearing up the confusion I can't shake. My mind works so hard to try to understand everything I can encounter, and it sure is working overdrive on this one, but I'm no closer to understanding now than I was as it was happening.
I never was angry at the man, and I'm still not. Whatever his reasons were, in the end he needed some kind of help, and perhaps his arrest will point him towards that help. Really, I felt sad for him. I felt sad for all the points in his life that led him to the one of violence with me. I felt sad for how his life may be so different now that he hit me. I felt sad that he didn't even see the wrong in what he had done, with they way in which he casually walked away revealing so much.
The police officer told me I would most likely never see him again, and I suppose I'm fine with that. But part of me wishes I could see him again, perhaps just in passing, just to say that I pray peace finds his life to free him from whatever led him to hit me, and that I forgive him.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Mid-Summer
It's nearing the end of July, and I've had a busy three weeks of Introduction to Christian History class. Four hours a day in class, five days a week, plus reading homework and then papers to write. Tomorrow is the final day, and the class had been great. So tomorrow will be a great day of ending as we talk about the last 50 years of Christian history, and then I'll be (mostly) free for the month of August to do a lot of something and a lot of nothing.
Also, the Giants are having a good month. Really, they are having a good year. How do I know this? Well, aside from checking out the Giants games, box scores, and stories, I find myself already checking the standings every day. In mid-July. With well over two months to go on the season. Yowza.
What have I learned? Well, as of tonight, the Giants are a fine four games in first place, tied for the largest division lead at this point. For those counting at home, they have the same number of wins as the Evil Empire (aka the Yankees) while scoring 125 fewer runs. Who needs high-priced free agents? Or the ability to score runs? Only the Phillies have allowed fewer runs than the Giants, which should make for an interesting series come October, should both get that far.
It's the same Giants as last year, but worse. Somehow, they find a way to win those one run games (at 26-13), and that's all it takes. A win by one run counts the same as a win by twenty.
If the Giants make it to the playoffs again, I'll be happy. If they make it to the World Series again, I'll got nuts. And if they win again? Well, I wasn't sure how I'd react to the first one last year, so I have no idea how I'd take two in a row. Of course, if they fall flat and miss the playoffs, I'll be sad, but then I can remember the glory of last October, for I'm sure I'll be feeling that one for a while.
But, seriously, it's too early for watching the standings every day. So much can happen in two and a half months. Just look where the Giants were last year at this time. You never know who will come from behind to make a run at it. You never know what Cinderella will fall apart (Pirates? Indians? Diamondbacks?). So what's the use with all this scoreboard watching with so much time left.
Now, do as I say, not as I do.
Also, the Giants are having a good month. Really, they are having a good year. How do I know this? Well, aside from checking out the Giants games, box scores, and stories, I find myself already checking the standings every day. In mid-July. With well over two months to go on the season. Yowza.
What have I learned? Well, as of tonight, the Giants are a fine four games in first place, tied for the largest division lead at this point. For those counting at home, they have the same number of wins as the Evil Empire (aka the Yankees) while scoring 125 fewer runs. Who needs high-priced free agents? Or the ability to score runs? Only the Phillies have allowed fewer runs than the Giants, which should make for an interesting series come October, should both get that far.
It's the same Giants as last year, but worse. Somehow, they find a way to win those one run games (at 26-13), and that's all it takes. A win by one run counts the same as a win by twenty.
If the Giants make it to the playoffs again, I'll be happy. If they make it to the World Series again, I'll got nuts. And if they win again? Well, I wasn't sure how I'd react to the first one last year, so I have no idea how I'd take two in a row. Of course, if they fall flat and miss the playoffs, I'll be sad, but then I can remember the glory of last October, for I'm sure I'll be feeling that one for a while.
But, seriously, it's too early for watching the standings every day. So much can happen in two and a half months. Just look where the Giants were last year at this time. You never know who will come from behind to make a run at it. You never know what Cinderella will fall apart (Pirates? Indians? Diamondbacks?). So what's the use with all this scoreboard watching with so much time left.
Now, do as I say, not as I do.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Who casts the first stone?
Checking out links on Facebook today led me to this story about the "The Marriage Vow" and the willingness of Republican Presidential candidates to sign it. Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum have already signed on, and others may be on the way shortly. If you'd like to take a look, read below.
The Marriage Vow
My quick summery after a read-through: the candidate pledges to "protect" marriage through various actions and legislation if elected to office. As I am generally a liberal fellow, you are probably not surprised in my lack of support for this document.
In wandering though the experience of reading this, I was struck by two things. First, the liberal reaction is mostly vitriol. Is the left really surprised by this? Here we see on paper exactly what a number of candidates have been talking about throughout their campaigns. The reaction to this on the right, I presume, is one of affirmation. These are, after all, Republican candidates looking for ways to distinguish themselves in a race full of a lot of look-a-likes. Telling their base in no uncertain terms exactly what they want to hear when it comes to social issues, so, no, I am not surprised by the news of the Vow, or that candidates are signing it, because that's what the Republican base wants.
And that leads me to my second thought, which I find much more important. If we describe ourselves as progressive, how are we to have a conversation with those that oppose us by starting the conversation with insults and belittling. I see progressives so quick to claim the high ground on so many issues with a reinvention of moral superiority the marginalized have sought so long to eliminate. Doesn't it seem the least bit hypocritical and pretentious to tell other people they need to stop bullying and name calling and finish by calling them stupid for not getting it?
Oh, I'm could talk about the problems I have with this vow and those candidates that support it, and I could for quite some time, but that's beyond the point. We can disagree with each other on how we view the world and how we implement policy. But if we truly believe that our vision for the country is better than some other vision, we cannot start down that road by stepping backwards into pettiness and thuggery. After all, that's what it is to call someone stupid.
I was reminded in class this week that, despite a many and varied differences, we are all human. It is important to remember that we all deserve compassion. We come from different social locations, political systems, and spiritual beliefs, but we must remember that we must be compassionate for every human, not matter how badly we disagree with them. Everyone had their bias on how they view the world, but if we add compassion to that bias, we can start a conversation about moving forward without moving backward.
The Marriage Vow
My quick summery after a read-through: the candidate pledges to "protect" marriage through various actions and legislation if elected to office. As I am generally a liberal fellow, you are probably not surprised in my lack of support for this document.
In wandering though the experience of reading this, I was struck by two things. First, the liberal reaction is mostly vitriol. Is the left really surprised by this? Here we see on paper exactly what a number of candidates have been talking about throughout their campaigns. The reaction to this on the right, I presume, is one of affirmation. These are, after all, Republican candidates looking for ways to distinguish themselves in a race full of a lot of look-a-likes. Telling their base in no uncertain terms exactly what they want to hear when it comes to social issues, so, no, I am not surprised by the news of the Vow, or that candidates are signing it, because that's what the Republican base wants.
And that leads me to my second thought, which I find much more important. If we describe ourselves as progressive, how are we to have a conversation with those that oppose us by starting the conversation with insults and belittling. I see progressives so quick to claim the high ground on so many issues with a reinvention of moral superiority the marginalized have sought so long to eliminate. Doesn't it seem the least bit hypocritical and pretentious to tell other people they need to stop bullying and name calling and finish by calling them stupid for not getting it?
Oh, I'm could talk about the problems I have with this vow and those candidates that support it, and I could for quite some time, but that's beyond the point. We can disagree with each other on how we view the world and how we implement policy. But if we truly believe that our vision for the country is better than some other vision, we cannot start down that road by stepping backwards into pettiness and thuggery. After all, that's what it is to call someone stupid.
I was reminded in class this week that, despite a many and varied differences, we are all human. It is important to remember that we all deserve compassion. We come from different social locations, political systems, and spiritual beliefs, but we must remember that we must be compassionate for every human, not matter how badly we disagree with them. Everyone had their bias on how they view the world, but if we add compassion to that bias, we can start a conversation about moving forward without moving backward.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Thoughts on New York
This beginning of this story is written elsewhere on this blog, but here's the quick summary: just over eleven years ago, I sat in my government class as a senior in high school fighting back tears as I explained why I was so upset a ban of gay marriage had passed in California. It was such a moment of despair for me, and I felt so alone in that classroom, as if every one of my classmates were against me.
I have to remind myself constantly these days that laws like this were passed even though same-sex marriage was already unavailable. Maryland passed the first law banning same-sex marriage in 1973, but by 1990, 40 of the 50 states had a law against it. And, of course, in 1996, President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act outlawing federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Then Hawaii courts declared a law prohibiting same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional according to the state constitution. The reaction came quickly in Hawaii and then spread around the country: amend the state constitution to get around the possible unconstitutionality of these laws. Amendments like these have spread like wildfire, a wave sweeping the nation. Every time a measure like this had come for a vote in front of the people, it has passed.
In 2000, there was no state in which same-sex marriage was legal. In only Vermont was there even a place in which the same rights as marriage were given same-sex couples through the invention of civil unions.
And yet, there was hope. Well, at least to me, there was hope. While other nations were starting to make headway towards legalized same-sex marriage, Vermont was really that clue for me, that kernel of hope that something could come along. To borrow from my friend, Howie, that was the whisper that started the wave.
In 2004, the city of San Francisco started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Other cities followed suit, and though those marriages were all eventually nullified, the voices were growing. Just a few months later, Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage.
With last weeks amazing effort by the government of New York, there are now six states in which same-sex marriage is legal. Another eight states allow rights equal to marriage to same-sex couples. Do the math, that's thirty six states in which same-sex marriage is not legal. With the passing of Proposition 8 in 2008, California is one of those states in which marriage is not legal (though it was for a time) even though civil unions with equal rights exist. I had friends that day that found the despair I had felt in my classroom so many years ago, and couldn't see how the future contained a place in which same-sex marriage existed.
Some might look at 36 states in which there are no equal rights, or question why eight states can't bring themselves to call a horse a horse and jump to legalized same-sex marriage. But I realized so many years ago, after my experience in high school and again in college as a freshman in Nebraska, that there are outcomes that come against you. There are people who want to keep you in your place and keep that status quo. There are events that conspire to to convince you to give up. It's so hard, but you have to ignore it all and keep focused on that shining light of victory.
Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on.
That is, in sum, what I told my friends then, and what I still say today. Thirty-six states outlawing same-sex marriage got you down? Need I remind you ten years ago, there were no states in which this was legal? Need I remind you of the advance of anti-discrimination laws in the last ten years, or the parents that have adopted because of the changes in laws? No, I'm not in despair of the states that still outlaw same-sex marriage. I am overjoyed that New York has joined the other five states, and I'm ready to celebrate number seven, whenever that comes. Because it will come.
Same-sex marriage may not be the be-all, end-all of equal rights for the LGBT community, but it's another step. Things like this take time, no matter what it is. So rejoice in this step, and then take another. And then another. And when that fight is done, move to the next one, until we are all equal in the eyes of the government, and, more importantly, in the eyes of each other.
I have to remind myself constantly these days that laws like this were passed even though same-sex marriage was already unavailable. Maryland passed the first law banning same-sex marriage in 1973, but by 1990, 40 of the 50 states had a law against it. And, of course, in 1996, President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act outlawing federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Then Hawaii courts declared a law prohibiting same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional according to the state constitution. The reaction came quickly in Hawaii and then spread around the country: amend the state constitution to get around the possible unconstitutionality of these laws. Amendments like these have spread like wildfire, a wave sweeping the nation. Every time a measure like this had come for a vote in front of the people, it has passed.
In 2000, there was no state in which same-sex marriage was legal. In only Vermont was there even a place in which the same rights as marriage were given same-sex couples through the invention of civil unions.
And yet, there was hope. Well, at least to me, there was hope. While other nations were starting to make headway towards legalized same-sex marriage, Vermont was really that clue for me, that kernel of hope that something could come along. To borrow from my friend, Howie, that was the whisper that started the wave.
In 2004, the city of San Francisco started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Other cities followed suit, and though those marriages were all eventually nullified, the voices were growing. Just a few months later, Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage.
With last weeks amazing effort by the government of New York, there are now six states in which same-sex marriage is legal. Another eight states allow rights equal to marriage to same-sex couples. Do the math, that's thirty six states in which same-sex marriage is not legal. With the passing of Proposition 8 in 2008, California is one of those states in which marriage is not legal (though it was for a time) even though civil unions with equal rights exist. I had friends that day that found the despair I had felt in my classroom so many years ago, and couldn't see how the future contained a place in which same-sex marriage existed.
Some might look at 36 states in which there are no equal rights, or question why eight states can't bring themselves to call a horse a horse and jump to legalized same-sex marriage. But I realized so many years ago, after my experience in high school and again in college as a freshman in Nebraska, that there are outcomes that come against you. There are people who want to keep you in your place and keep that status quo. There are events that conspire to to convince you to give up. It's so hard, but you have to ignore it all and keep focused on that shining light of victory.
Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on.
That is, in sum, what I told my friends then, and what I still say today. Thirty-six states outlawing same-sex marriage got you down? Need I remind you ten years ago, there were no states in which this was legal? Need I remind you of the advance of anti-discrimination laws in the last ten years, or the parents that have adopted because of the changes in laws? No, I'm not in despair of the states that still outlaw same-sex marriage. I am overjoyed that New York has joined the other five states, and I'm ready to celebrate number seven, whenever that comes. Because it will come.
Same-sex marriage may not be the be-all, end-all of equal rights for the LGBT community, but it's another step. Things like this take time, no matter what it is. So rejoice in this step, and then take another. And then another. And when that fight is done, move to the next one, until we are all equal in the eyes of the government, and, more importantly, in the eyes of each other.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Have you been following this story?
A college football player, returning to campus following the death of a friend, was pulled off a US Airways flight last week for not complying with the orders of flight attendants and the captain of the plane to pull up his pants that were sagging low enough to expose his underwear. When I first read it, I thought it was a little bit of a strange story. Are we really making big deals about what people are wearing on airplanes, in San Francisco no less? I understand folks get nervous about security on flights these days, but doesn't it seem a little over the top?
Almost immediately there was a question on the motive of his removal from the flight. Were they attempting to remove him from the flight because they thought he was dressed inappropriately? Were they attempting to remove him from the flight because they thought he was a security risk based on his reaction? Or were they attempting to remove him from the flight because they stereotyped him in the first place, letting his appearance tell a story that didn't match to what was going on.
But then the story deepens with a video posting of the interaction on the plane. From the video, it's pretty clear that he is not doing anything that warrants concern beyond wanting to just get home. According to the witnesses he had already complied with the request of the airline employees, albeit delayed from the timing desired by the airline. So the police arrested him for, among other things, refusing to comply with the orders of the captain and resisting arrest. Given the video, it seems a little odd. I'm having trouble understanding why it had to get taken to the level it was. Unless, of course, you consider that racial stereotypes played a role in the matter.
And then we arrive at today, where there is a report that a man exposing more of his body (in only women's undergarments, as the picture shows) travelling on a plane, where the airline employees ignored the complaints of the customers. From the story: "A white man is allowed to fly in underwear without question, but my client was asked to pull up his pajama pants because they hung below his waist."
The airline can hide behind the company line of "he should have followed the directions of the flight crew." I think there's a certain amount of that in this, but that's not the whole truth. Not by any stretch of the imagination. While the racial motive question was brought up quickly, the evidence is building more and more and more.
This is how trust is broken. This is how peace falls apart. This is how everything that has been gain disappears in just an instance. We can say this is an isolated incident, or that we wouldn't do the same in a similar situation, or that we shouldn't let one (or a few) bad apples ruin it for the rest of us. But none of that does justice to Deshon Marman, or his family, or his friend that passed so tragically a month ago. How easily could this have turned into another situation like the tragedy in the loss of Oscar Grant, a story once again rehashed in the news even as this incident on the plane was happening?
It is incumbent upon all of us to ensure these things don't happen. It is incumbent upon all of us to stand up and say when we see injustice. It is incumbent upon all of us to recognize that this situation could happen in front of us any day, at any time, and speak the truth in those situations. Without everyone recognizing as an individual the role we each play in creating justice in the world, there is still work to do.
Almost immediately there was a question on the motive of his removal from the flight. Were they attempting to remove him from the flight because they thought he was dressed inappropriately? Were they attempting to remove him from the flight because they thought he was a security risk based on his reaction? Or were they attempting to remove him from the flight because they stereotyped him in the first place, letting his appearance tell a story that didn't match to what was going on.
But then the story deepens with a video posting of the interaction on the plane. From the video, it's pretty clear that he is not doing anything that warrants concern beyond wanting to just get home. According to the witnesses he had already complied with the request of the airline employees, albeit delayed from the timing desired by the airline. So the police arrested him for, among other things, refusing to comply with the orders of the captain and resisting arrest. Given the video, it seems a little odd. I'm having trouble understanding why it had to get taken to the level it was. Unless, of course, you consider that racial stereotypes played a role in the matter.
And then we arrive at today, where there is a report that a man exposing more of his body (in only women's undergarments, as the picture shows) travelling on a plane, where the airline employees ignored the complaints of the customers. From the story: "A white man is allowed to fly in underwear without question, but my client was asked to pull up his pajama pants because they hung below his waist."
The airline can hide behind the company line of "he should have followed the directions of the flight crew." I think there's a certain amount of that in this, but that's not the whole truth. Not by any stretch of the imagination. While the racial motive question was brought up quickly, the evidence is building more and more and more.
This is how trust is broken. This is how peace falls apart. This is how everything that has been gain disappears in just an instance. We can say this is an isolated incident, or that we wouldn't do the same in a similar situation, or that we shouldn't let one (or a few) bad apples ruin it for the rest of us. But none of that does justice to Deshon Marman, or his family, or his friend that passed so tragically a month ago. How easily could this have turned into another situation like the tragedy in the loss of Oscar Grant, a story once again rehashed in the news even as this incident on the plane was happening?
It is incumbent upon all of us to ensure these things don't happen. It is incumbent upon all of us to stand up and say when we see injustice. It is incumbent upon all of us to recognize that this situation could happen in front of us any day, at any time, and speak the truth in those situations. Without everyone recognizing as an individual the role we each play in creating justice in the world, there is still work to do.
Friday, June 10, 2011
In Your Eyes
Peter Gabriel is in town tonight. I don't have the $50 for the cheapest ticket for myself. Clearly, we do not have $100 so both Kelse and I could both go. And then she's working tonight anyway.
It's an outdoor concert over on Cal campus, less than a mile from here. In fact, a few hours ago I heard them warming up. Yes, we can here it all the way over here. I thought about walking over to campus and finding a place to sit and just listen.
But then, I thought, how could I enjoy hearing this without Kelse?
"In Your Eyes" is, of course, our song. This version was the one we danced our first dance to at our wedding. It was magical to spend over ten minutes dancing, and inviting others to dance with us, until the entire crowd was sharing the joy of the experience. This song never fails to make me smile whenever I hear it. Ultimate mood lifter.
But I don't think hearing it live tonight while she is working would make me smile. It'd be incomplete. So I'm staying home tonight. We'll get to see him someday, for sure. And we'll dance, again, with everyone else.
It's an outdoor concert over on Cal campus, less than a mile from here. In fact, a few hours ago I heard them warming up. Yes, we can here it all the way over here. I thought about walking over to campus and finding a place to sit and just listen.
But then, I thought, how could I enjoy hearing this without Kelse?
"In Your Eyes" is, of course, our song. This version was the one we danced our first dance to at our wedding. It was magical to spend over ten minutes dancing, and inviting others to dance with us, until the entire crowd was sharing the joy of the experience. This song never fails to make me smile whenever I hear it. Ultimate mood lifter.
But I don't think hearing it live tonight while she is working would make me smile. It'd be incomplete. So I'm staying home tonight. We'll get to see him someday, for sure. And we'll dance, again, with everyone else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)