The Future of Discrimination: White Male

I’ve been waiting for this article. Perhaps there have been others espousing similar points of view, but leave it to some brilliant graduate student of philosophy, of all things, to express what I’ve been guessing at all along: the blame the white narrative is getting much more pointed.

Here’s the article if you want to read it. Not at all a surprising addition to the back list of of Huntington Post. You may want to read it before eating, though it might prove an effective means of losing one’s appetite. HUFFPOST South Africa

If you want to be spared the gross negligence your eyes may suffer while reading it, let me summarize. This forward-thinking philosophy student is posing the question of whether it’s time to put a moratorium on white male voting. This is coming from the post-Apartheid South African context. The reason for disenfranchising the white males, even for a period of 20 years as she suggests, is to redistribute wealth that white males have stolen over the years (stolen through capitalism, cronyism, white male privilege and other such ways, I suppose) so that a fair and equitable society can emerge. It would be a positive, long overdue step to help right the wrongs of the past.

I’ve seen this coming, this philosophy, this radical departure from sanity. And it won’t take long for some far-flung politician to pick it up and throw it in the debate arena. The push will be slow and steady until one government, undoubtedly democratically elected, will inch towards compensation, demanding a wide range of actions meant to address historical grievances against the white male.

In full disclosure, I am a white male. I’ve lived the last twenty years in different cultures, working alongside people from all backgrounds, creeds, and ethnicity. I’ve been in schools where diversity isn’t lauded, it’s a simple backdrop of life. My first child was five years old when she finally realized that all her friends had black hair. There is a movement in the world, there are people in the world, there are day to day interactions in this world which have come to the point where differences and backgrounds and colors and creeds and social envy means nothing because everyone is treated the same.

This is what real progress looks like. I’ve seen it, and yes, I know the world is not a dreamy-eyed utopia and it never will be. There are problems. But hearkening backwards looking for villains who happen to be white and male is the essence of anti-progress. You do not compensate historical grievances by stripping people of rights. You can not further progress by ripping apart one of the modern world’s founding tenets of progress: universal suffrage.  I just wish a certain graduate student would realize that philosophy is dead if this is the best you can come up with. Heaven help us if this is the future of education. Heaven help us if this is the future of our world.

Perhaps I’ll discover it was all a mistake. A piece of brilliant satire. But I doubt it, because I knew it was coming.

On a brighter note, this world of ours continues to be an unending source of new writing materials. I guess I should thank her for that. Now let me get to work on that new play. A satire, perhaps.

The Most Loathsome Column of the Day

An editor at the Washingtonian stated that the phrase “start a family” was “the most loathsome phrase of the day” because it degrades those couples who many not be able to have children.

So I’ve nominated that fine piece of journalism as the most loathsome column of the day.

But in keeping with the spirit of Washingtonian Wisdom, I tried to come up with my own list of loathsome phrases which we should also purge from our vocabulary. Here they are:

Start a rally. A baseball phrase meaning trying to score runs and come back from a deficit. I think we should strike this phrase from our vocabulary since it degenerates those baseball teams who never have rallies and are perennial losers.

Start me up. The Rolling Stones phrase might offend people who can’t be started. Or don’t want to start.

Start a revolution. Could make fun of those living under authoritarian regimes who don’t know how to start their own revolution.

Start your engines. This could hurt both those who have faulty engines or the poor who can’t even afford any engine.

Start with me. A peculiar Christian phrase which tells God to make changes in the world by first making changes with me. This might offend those who have no me-ness. Or who are dead.

Start fresh. This might offend those who appreciate stale living. It also ignores past mistakes, so that’s not good.

Start in safe mode. This would be an affront to techies who want to by-pass safe mode and just let their computer crash. It’s their right, after all.

Start high school. This would be particularly offensive to those who fail 8th grade.

Start recording. Please, what about those who don’t want a record of a particular event. Or those who have no recording devices?

Start of something new. This is simply a way to discriminate against those who love the old. Stop pushing, people!

Start to finish. From start to finish, this was a waste of time. Thanks, Washingtonian. Here’s the original loathsome column if you dare to read.

Loathsome Phrase of the Day: “Start a Family”

Is softball becoming too soft? Or is it just life?

At the risk of sounding like an old person yearning for the nostalgic past, sometime’s I feel like an old person yearning for the nostalgic past.

Is softball too frightening now that we must completely bend the rules in order to keep the kids safe from “boo-boos”?

First, it started with the orange first base. (Here’s one in case you’ve never seen it:)

It was introduced in our league (and many others) as a way of avoiding collisions at first base. The batter, when running to first, has to touch the orange base and the first baseman has to touch the white base. For some reason, in all of my years playing baseball starting at age ten, we never had an orange base for the runners to hit. That’s an awful lot of games through many, many years. Did the runner sometimes have to avoid an errant throw? Sure. Might have the first baseman occasionally hit the runner? Sure! But, amazingly, I survived it all, and so did every other teammate I’ve ever had.

OK, I know what you are thinking. It’s not a bad idea to have an orange base which separates the fielder from the batter. It doesn’t change the game in any real tangible way while providing a level of protection. I agree. I can live with it. But, what would you say if a league instituted a rule where the runner no longer is ALLOWED to touch home plate to score a run. That’s right. I used the word ‘allowed’. If a runner running home touches home plate, the runner is automatically out. I’m sorry, but what kind of weird sports universe are we living in these days.

I was introduced to this rule change in our particular league just this past weekend. A runner coming home has to “run past the yellow line” and not touch home plate. The catcher is NOT allowed to tag the runner. That’s right, there is not allowed to be any tag-outs at home plate.

This rule not only prevents collisions, it stops the spreading of germs as well.

I’m sorry, but softball where you can no longer run home is barely even softball. The home plate is one of those iconic images of all of sports-a place of safety-the image of accomplishment. It’s what a player strives for. No one ever strives for a yellow-line.

Unfortunately, this is just another ridiculous manifestation of a society which has to pamper and protect instead of encouraging accomplishment, trial and error, and risk.

Soon there may be orange bases at second and third. Perhaps we should give the kids extra padding so as to not come into contact with any fielders anywhere. Also, maybe live pitches need to be banned because they do sometimes hit the batter, causing bruising. Perhaps all types of softball and baseball should become tee-ball to make it more safe. However, the fielders, perhaps, should have to position themselves outside the foul line in order not to catch a line-drive in the throat. Oh, but what about foul balls? OK, maybe all players can remain in the dugout until the ball is hit, then they will race out onto the field and if the fielder gets the ball and touches home plate before the runner crosses the yellow line, then there is an out. But this would be encouraging kids to fun fast and they might fall down and scrap their knees.

You know what, just forget sports and give them their ipads. That’s what they want anyways. It also might save my head from exploding.