Thursday, January 31, 2019

I'm not listening!!! Some comments on the social war between the old and young.

I was going to try to leap into this topic without one of my lengthy preliminary statements. After a few tries, I remember that I’m just not good at it.

I’ve written here recently on topics like identity politics and “civil rights” (8/28/17), the Kavanaugh debacle (10/2/18), the Metoo movement (11/2/18 and 6/12/18), over-sensitivity, the lack of sense of humor, self-victimization and apologies (6/12/18). I don’t want to repeat myself too much, so my approach here will be a little different. My perspective is, not surprisingly, that of a middle-class, middle-age guy raised on Long Island. I’m not sure if being white also figures in, but I think most people assume it does (I’m not sure that most middle-aged, middle-class black and Hispanic men and women don’t agree with me – I don’t know). And I was also raised in a Jewish family and was raised around a lot of Jews. That may figure in too, but I don’t think so because I seem to be on the same page with my Christian raised peers too. That is, almost everyone I know, roughly my age (up to their 80s), feels pretty much the same. To my surprise, the one exception I can think of, the gentleman I usually refer to herein as Eddie or my favorite liberal, actually also agrees on some of these things although I doubt he would express it to other true believers. And though it is a fairly small sample, it is enough that I expect it is probably a large majority of people in the same peer group.

The things people tell me, the things you read about on these topics, just make me shake my head (not alone either) and wonder where we are headed. Just as a few examples from I believe the last six months - the Yale couple who urged students not to lose their head over seeing Halloween costumes that might offend them, but to discuss rather than overreact caused some students to threaten to leave the school unless the couple was terminated (because, I guess, any discussion would mean disagreement was unacceptable?); the astronaut who apologized for quoting Winston Churchill because he must now be seen as only a racist; Tom Brokaw, who had to apologize for having the opinion that Hispanic immigrants should try to assimilate (because it is a bad idea that immigrants assimilate?), the woman who gave free yoga lessons at the U. of Ottawa having her classes canceled because yoga, long practiced in our country, was deemed “cultural appropriation” (cultural appropriation being as dumb a theory as actual racial hatred, in my hallowed opinioned – every culture is an amalgamation of many other cultures and cultural exchange should be encouraged), the Duke professor who had to step down as director of graduate students for urging Chinese students to speak English on campus (even though she was defended by some outraged Chinese students who said she was anything but a racist; I think she was incorrect in thinking that important, but the reaction was ridiculous); the Kentucky students who were libeled and slandered in the media after being harassed by racist members of a black religious group (“Black Hebrew Israelites”?); Oxford U. staff being warned that avoiding eye contact may be deemed racist, that they shouldn’t ask someone where they are from (I ask all the time – it seems to me people love to be respectfully asked about it) or joke about an accent; the poor snook who was fired in (I think Australia) because he said the newest British princess, a former actress, was “not bad,” even though his female co-workers weren’t sanctioned for calling her hot; even the actor Kevin Hart fired from hosting the Oscars because earlier in his career, he made jokes about gays (still common on television shows and in movies) and now admits he’s changed his mind.

You can dismiss these as just a few anecdotes in billions of interactions of people every day, but they are just examples of what I think is going on everywhere. The stories are endless. Maybe it’s not many, but when every young police officer I’ve spoken to has told me that they and their fellow officers try to avoid arresting a black person because of the chance of being called a racist, too many teachers have told me horror stories about how they aren’t allowed to teach their class for fear of litigation by a student they are told they cannot discipline (b/c they are either black or handicapped) or that they are not permitted to use distinctions like boy or girl (and I’ve yet to discuss it with even a liberal who thinks that makes sense), been told by too many people – and that includes women – that their offices have become insane over harassment/discrimination issues, for me to think that the world isn’t rank with this stuff. Feel free to believe it’s not happening.

So, the following is just a discussion of some of the things people in my peer group are thinking and saying to each other:

Intent matters

Nowadays, when someone is offended, it seems to not matter a lick to cultural warriors on the left whether the offender meant to offend anyone or was actually being racist, misogynist, etc. And, there are many in business and professions, terrified about being labeled and they or their company losing money or their jobs, apologizing to beat the band. One absolutely crazy example is the New York Times’ Crossword Puzzle editor who apologized publicly for using the word “beaner.” The clue was about baseball pitchers who pitched at batters’ heads – “Pitch to the head, informally.” A well-known metaphor for head is a bean. There was nothing ethnic at all about it. Not remotely. Didn’t matter, as a Times’ spokesperson stated wrote - “Tuesday’s Crossword puzzle included an entry that was offensive and hurtful. It is simply not acceptable in The New York Times Crossword and we apologize for including it.”
Despite the fact that neither the editor, Will Shortz, or his co-worker had ever heard of a racial slur for Hispanics being “beaner” (nor I), he apologized. 
My family and friends either groan or laugh when I make my stupid joke when someone refers to a “black” car or shirt by saying, “You mean African-American shirt, don’t you?” You can think its racist if you like, but the point of the joke is that sensitivity to racial matters shouldn’t include benign references that sound like something racist, or could be racist in another context. Do you know how many people cringe when the mere word “black” is used when a black person is present, or who look around to make sure there isn’t?
What the hell is wrong with a non-apology apology?
While we are on apologies, they matter. So do fake ones. It seems to me that many apologies publicly made these days are false. It is really about power, that is, the offended group forcing the innocent offender to not just apologize, but to prove they are sincerely apologizing and accede the offended party’s views.
Cam Newton, an NFL QB of whom I’m not a fan (though he is an amazing athlete) apologized last year for making a joke when a female reporter asked him about a wide receiver’s “routes” (i.e., for those who don’t know, the path they run). He heard it from everyone – and, it was a dumb joke, as there have been women reporting on football since at least he was a little kid if not longer. Nevertheless, he was making a joke based on the fact that most women don’t play league football where a receiver would be running routes. He didn’t mean to insult her, however stupid it might be. If you want to see someone really angry lie through his teeth, watch the video of his apology.
I’ve had this discussion many times with people. Apologizing when you don’t mean it because you don’t feel you’ve done anything wrong is an insult to the person you are apologizing too. It actually is okay to give a non-apology apology though – I’m sorry if I’ve upset you, or, I know you feel that way or it makes me sad that you are upset, etc., because that is genuine. I call bologna on this absurd notion that non-apology apologies are wrong when they are actually truthful.
What’s wrong with non-apology apologies? I’ll tell you, they are only wrong if there is no discussion allowed, if the truth doesn’t matter and it’s about power. And, in the cultural wars, that is really what it is about.
What happened to color blind?
I was alive during the ‘60s and ‘70s, when Civil Rights actually meant civil rights and was about justice and equality under the law. I wrote on this subject in Killing the dream - again (8/28/17), concerning how modern so-called civil rights advocates have flipped around MLK’s dream that one day we would judge each other by the content of character rather than skin-color. So, I’ll keep this short, but read these advocates to try to understand their point of view. It is about color. One well known author, Michael Eric Dyson, has even gone so far as to state, and not just metaphorically, that blacks need a country where there are only blacks, in order to heal their wounds and I guess feel better. Not only is that racist, but insults them, stereotypes them and smacks of apartheid. Yet no doubt he and other advocates of victimization and separationism, like Ta-Nehisi Coates are the leaders.
White people listening to black people witness their anger (even if they are millionaires) is not the answer. White people acknowledging their privilege isn’t either. I quote Supreme Court Justice John Roberts a lot – “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race, is to stop discrimination on the basis of race.” I’m not sure that he will stay with that, given political realities concerning the court and his role on it, but even if he took it back, I’d agree.
The idea that there is one set of rules for people of this color or this gender (or whatever identity distinction) and another for others is self-defeating. Those who consider themselves victims based on their identity will never stop feeling like one until they adopt the same principle – morals and ethics should be color-blind.
I certainly don’t apply this only to blacks. It seems like everyone and his brother wants to be an oppressed minority these days (except, generally speaking, the Irish – don’t ask me why). If you can say a word, you aren’t privileged because of your social status to own the use of it, and expect others to use it. If you can tell a joke because you are Jewish, black, Christian, etc., so can others.
The dumbest social warrior position
Which leads me to the dumbest of social warrior positions – cultural appropriation. There are no black lines around cultures, communities and social movements. One culture taking ideas from another – and vice versa, is how the world works. It is how it always worked. It is how languages change and split, it is how we improve and learn things. We should want other cultures to appropriate what we do in terms of the enlightenment principles. We should want other cultures to share our values and even our arts and technology. And we do. No ethnic group owns something like yoga or karate or football (either kind). Is it cultural appropriation when other countries play baseball or football? Of course not.
We do have intellectual property laws, and it is best when they are obeyed. But, not everything is covered. The bottom line is, it’s good when ideas are spread, particularly good ones.
What do those complaining about the professor teaching yoga want? – that only Indians should be allowed to teach yoga? Only the Chinese can make Chinese food or only Hispanics can be Zorro for Halloween? That’s a recipe for stagnation, not growth. Give credit where it is due, if you know. That’s important to me. But, the idea that one culture or community owns something because they are a minority – is regoddamdiculous. And, yeah, I stole that from John Wayne, who I believe was an Anglo-Saxon by heritage. And I heard my friend, Mike, an Italian, quote him first. So what? Personal friend appropriation?
The great irony of it is – the natural counterpart to not appropriating from other cultures, is to stereotype people. So, if I shouldn’t teach yoga because I am not Indian (and not because I am incapable of doing yoga, though that appears true), should I assume that Indians all do yoga? I’m sure I would be castigated for stereotyping. 
The answer to every dispute isn’t to destroy someone’s life
You’re fired. You’re suspended. You can’t play. That’s the result lately when someone says or does something that social warriors don’t like.
The idea that someone who disagrees with you or says something you don’t like should have their life ruined is way too common. It’s almost the “go to” position these days.  A teacher tells her class there’s no Santa. Not, Ms. Smith, go tell your class that that’s just your opinion and to ask their parents – she’s fired. Fired. A principal, trying to follow the stupid rules about not making the winter break just for Christians says, no candy-canes, because the J represents Jesus. They didn’t say, Principal Smith, it’s okay, just tell everyone candy canes are just easy to hang up and its okay to use them, or, thank her for trying to be inclusive – they suspended her. I don’t know what happened to her after that. Rob Gronkowski, a player I usually like just got in hot water for making a sexual innuendo to a woman reporter that he’s made before about his favorite number. I don’t think the NFL will – but there are calls for him not being able to play. If he thinks it is okay to tell a sex joke and they don’t think so – why should he be suspended? Could the NFL do it? Of course, we know they can just because it’s “bad” for football. But, it’s ridiculous. The list of people fired or suspended for opinions that others don’t like is just disturbing. Don’t start me on the guy from Google again.
Try to know the difference between being stumbled over and kicked
I love saying to my favorite liberal, “Congratulations, your team destroyed American’s sense of humor.” It’s not just that kids are so sensitive and so attuned to racial justice that ethnic humor is dead – many examples, go google – but almost any comedian who makes fun of anyone other than straight white males is going to get the boot – sometimes literally. A number of well-known comedians have complained about it or stopped performing on college campuses.
I went to Gettysburg with some friends. When the guide was starting up I asked him to go slow because my friend in the back was Italian. My friend didn’t get insulted. He came back with - and my friend’s Jewish – don’t count on much of a tip. I didn’t get upset either (how could I?) We just all laughed.
When I was growing up we told ethnic jokes all the time. Maybe it is not why everyone laughs, but I did because what was said was outrageous or a ridiculous stereotype. I think it is why most people laugh. Not so much anymore. When people send me jokes now, I ask them if that is on their work phone, because their employer will be happy to look through it if they want to get rid of him.
Back when I was young, we had Don Rickles saying outrageous things on stage to minorities. I really don’t think they were offended. They knew the difference. One of my favorite expressions is . . . even a dog knows the difference between being stumbled over and kicked. I am not sure if someone would that routine could succeed anymore. Certainly not a white male. Could you even make the movie Blazing Saddles anymore? It was filled with jokes that now would be criticized as horrifically racist.
Sex, flirting, dating, sexual references, liking someone, smiling – isn’t all harassment
I wrote too recently about this too go into a rant, but I recently had a conversation with a young woman (mid-late 20s) that shocked me and everyone I related our conversation to. I know her family (none readers) and she’s a nice girl, someone I think is very intelligent and certainly raised well. But, she has made it clear before that she doesn’t think women are treated fairly at work. I agree to some extent. We were discussing Kavanaugh and metoo type things and she expressed the opinion that no one should be confirmed as a judge (probably other offices) if they have even been accused of harassment. She suggested that I would never put myself in a position where someone could even accuse me of sexual harassment. I immediately said it wasn’t true, that many of my peers discussed with each other, including myself, after metoo took off, what consensual sexual behavior or flirting or joking we engaged in when young could be made out to be harassment now or remembered as such by the women now, years later. And we all knew, that no matter how we squawked it was consensual, mutual, etc., few would believe us or care. I related a couple examples to her. In one of the examples I mentioned that the woman involved, who had a lot of leeway at her job, told me that she had invited me to work there (without even mentioning it to our boss), my first full-time job, because she had a crush on me (and a few times over the years, we spontaneously we kissed). The young woman’s response to that was that I should have reported her for hiring me for that reason. I was stunned. So were the other adults at the table. So is everyone I tell it to. I asked her then, why would I report someone who got me my job? Her response was that it was inappropriate. Again, this doesn’t come from a maniac or someone with a lot of problems, but a nice, normal person who has been raised in a certain mindset foreign to the way that older people were raised. And, it is not just different – it’s worse. What I didn’t tell her was that it would have been pretty hard to report it to my boss – he was sleeping with her.  
I still think metoo is important, but it has jumped the shark. The handful of actual monsters, exaggerated because they are celebrities, pales in comparison with the effect on millions of people. Women knowing they can speak up about harassment or worse is something I’ve been preaching for a long time. But, the excesses of it are not mere occasional happenstance. People are afraid at work, people are chilled at work from having relationships or kidding around. What almost everyone I know says about the metoo movement – that we feel sorry for young people who have to work in that environment.
You can’t treat women the same as men at work if there is a fear of being fired
Something else that came out of that same conversation was her expression that women should be treated the same as men at work, including socially. Well, I agree as far as things like equal pay for equal work, promotions, career opportunities. But, not everything. First, clearly, men can’t say the same things to women that they can say to each other, for fear of being accused of harassment. Moreover, if they can’t ask someone out on a date at work (or they are limited to one rejection, as this young woman told me was the policy at Facebook), how can they ask them out to dinner as they would a man?  Do they have to say magic words, “as friends?” And what are their concerns as to what might be misinterpreted by a woman that would not be by a man?  What means one thing to a women does not seem the same to a man and vice versa. If you don’t believe that, I think you are kidding yourself.
What’s happened, I’m advised by reading articles and also what men have told me, is that as a result of the excesses of metoo, many men do not want to socialize with women they work with outside of work, and many men don’t want to hire women. It’s a shame, but I get it. People want to avoid trouble. Is that wrong? Who among us would not advise this to our friend in our personal lives? If they are having trouble with or were fearful of someone, or some group, wouldn’t we say, - avoid entanglement with them?
I’m not listening!!!
Do you remember the scene in The Princess Bride with Miracle Max (Billy Crystal) and his wife (Carol Kane), where Max is running away from her yelling “I’m not listening!!!!”? If not -
The point of much of politics, litigation, even arguments between regular folks, is to try to get the third party – the electorate, the judge, friends and family - not to listen to the other side. The reason that it is so important is that it often is much more persuasive than facts or reason. Once people are primed to believe one side and not even listen to the other, the primer has effectively won the argument, even if it is crazy.
This has been accomplished in many ways. Right now, many young people, indoctrinated through school or family (as I was) have a number of strategies where argument or debate becomes almost impossible. Young people, who are more open to new ideas, but also more gullible than older people (a broad generalization, obviously), have accepted that –
- ideas they don’t like are violent and therefore can be stopped by force.
- similarly, ideas they don’t like are hate speech and therefore not protected by the first amendment!
- there should be safety zones in colleges where young people are spared the pain of hearing others’ views.
- ideas you don't like should be met with screeching! I’m not sure exactly what to call it, but screeching will do. I’m only seen this in videos, which sometimes go viral. Usually, these are women, hearing what they don’t want to hear at a public gathering, who then begin screeching with a high pitched and hysterical tone, sometimes accompanied by frenzied arm movement, as if they are terrified or going out of their minds with anguish. The only way to stop the uncomfortable screeching is to stop speaking. It can actually be quite effective, as people often shy away from or avoid people they think are crazed or hysterical. I actually dated someone (for a short while), who employed this technique. It didn’t work, but we weren’t in a public meeting. I even recognized one screecher from a video who came a few years later to be a screecher at the Kavanaugh hearing. I wondered if she hired out for it or if she just went where she wanted.  
- it is okay to drown out disagreeable speakers with noise or even violence. This has become popular when right-wing speakers speak or to stop a congressional hearing.
Who’s left standing like a statue?
In the last few years it has also become popular to demand the removal of statues that offend people, usually based on the claim that they were racist. I’m actually not opposed to their removal by popular demand by those we’ve elected or who they’ve appointed to make these decisions. Statues don’t have to be forever. I’m sure few Americans were concerned either when in revolutions, statues of Lenin and Saddam, for example, were torn down. We are not in a civil war, and self-help here is plain wrong. No vandalism, please. Thank you.
I was in Richmond, Va. a while go, and looking at all the confederate statues thinking, this is weird. Why are they celebrating the people who were defending slavery? I know, it’s about honor and heritage, which I heard a bit when I lived down there. I do get it, but, I can absolutely understand being offended by it. Imagine if you went to Germany and there were statues of Hitler, Goebbels and Goering throughout Berlin? I know it would make me uncomfortable.
That being said, where do we end it? For some people, anything someone said that was discriminatory, any act whatsoever, no matter how far in the past, no matter how they changed or how common the behavior was.
Yes, George Washington participated in slavery. I understand why that upsets some people because he knew it was an abomination, although he was born and raised in the system. Some people in his station (and other founders) rejected it, made amends for it by freeing their slaves and even seeing to their support. But, given the times he lived in, does it cancel out his greatness and importance to us? Abraham Lincoln, by today’s standards, was a virulent racist. So was Teddy Roosevelt. Jefferson’s behavior was repugnant. Do we tear down Mt. Rushmore? Some people want Christopher Columbus forgotten, which given his times, when slavery existed almost everywhere and had since historical times at the least (and we can be sure well before), is just ridiculous. There are people who want to take down Gandhi’s statues because he made some regrettable statements. Gandhi! Imagine. Who’s left? Thoreau, who inspired Gandhi was looked down on women, in general. Jesus accepted slavery. Read your New Testament. Einstein made racist statements (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/albert-einstein-travel-diaries-reveal-racist-and-xenophobic-views/) before decrying racism. Martin Luther King, Jr. used the dreaded “N” word and treated a woman, his wife, poorly, routinely cheating on her.

Time does matter.

One of the other things that seems to be a principle among the young is that no amount of time or apology seems to be sufficient. Tulsi Gabbard, a Democrat, opposed gay marriage and worked against it in the late '90s and early '00s with her dad. She has obviously changed her mind as has a majority of our nation. She's apologized (which she shouldn't have to - but leave that aside). Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton opposed gay marriage. Are they going to be shunted aside now? I doubt that, but, leave that aside too. That was at least 15 years ago. The governor of Virginia, a Democrat, may (I think he did) have been in blackface or posed as a klansman, for Halloween back in 1984. Obviously, he is not a racist. He'll be, like yours truly, 60 this year. He was probably 25 at the time he did it. Even if it is now an emotional crime to pose on Halloween as something evil or shocking or wrong, which is also nuts, do we no longer give a pass to people who do things when they are young. Assume, for argument's sake, that this was wrong of him. And he was a mean racist. 35 years is not enough time to say, that was then, this is now. 

*

Sure, I could go on, but I usually use the 8th page of a single-spaced Word doc. as an arbitrary end line for the benefit of my beloved readers. 
I will just finish by saying, that I think people just like me were making the same type of complaints I am making here about stuff that we think is just fine, even desirable now, when I was a kid. And perhaps, 50 years from now, my great-grandchild will be thanking this generation too, for this way of thinking. I don't think so. I think Fonzie jumped the shark and that way of thinking is heading towards re-education classes. Already, professionals are being forced to take political classes evincing the principals that they are almost inherently racist and misogynist. What's next. We will see - has become one of my most off-repeated statement.

Wish you could comment anonymously. Feel free to email me a comment at dheisenberg@gmail.com and I will publish it under whatever name you like.

About Me

My photo
I started this blog in September, 2006. Mostly, it is where I can talk about things that interest me, which I otherwise don't get to do all that much, about some remarkable people who should not be forgotten, philosophy and theories (like Don Foster's on who wrote A Visit From St. Nicholas and my own on whether Santa is mostly derived from a Norse god) and analysis of issues that concern me. Often it is about books. I try to quote accurately and to say when I am paraphrasing (more and more). Sometimes I blow the first name of even very famous people, often entertainers. I'm much better at history, but once in a while I see I have written something I later learned was not true. Sometimes I fix them, sometimes not. My worst mistake was writing that Beethoven went blind, when he actually went deaf. Feel free to point out an error. I either leave in the mistake, or, if I clean it up, the comment pointing it out. From time to time I do clean up grammar in old posts as, over time I have become more conventional in my grammar, and I very often write these when I am falling asleep and just make dumb mistakes. It be nice to have an editor, but . . . .