So today’s blog is supposed to be about someone I judged based on a first impression, but as I told Sonya, that just doesn’t sound fun to me. So instead I figured I’d blog about a few topics that have had me FUMING the past few days.
-Facepalm #1-
Long story short, a kid on a middle school basketball team refused to cut his hair to the specifications set by the coach, he was subsequently kicked off of the team for refusing to adhere to the rules. What was his parents’ reaction? To sue the school of course!
It is commonly stated that the goal of school is to prepare future generations for the “real world,” and here in the real world there are guidelines for appearance. The Yankees (ick, this is the only time I will ever use them as a positive example for anything) have rules about hair length, facial hair, and “bling.” It’s a simple thing, be clean cut. Don’t look like a scrub. You wanna be a big basketball player you’ve got to look the part. Don’t get me wrong I’m all for self expression, but this is one of those times where I don’t get it. It’s hair people! It’ll grow back. The rule states that the hair can’t touch the collar, ears, or eyebrows. It’s about having a uniformed look for the team. Simple as that.
Now I’d like to reply to the two main arguments that were left on the yahoo page about this story:
1. “The school can’t make him cut his hair!” It’s not the school. It’s the athletic department. They’re not going to expel him for not cutting his hair. School is a right. At school you adhere to the school’s rules. Extracurricular activities are a privilege, you choose to participate you choose to abide by their rules.
2. “They don’t make the girls cut their hair! That makes it discrimination!” No, it does not. Why? Because the girls are on a different team, most likely coached by a different coach. Coaches have the right to make rules for their teams. Furthermore, is it discrimination to say that at a school with uniforms girls may wear pants or a skirt but boys may only wear pants? No, it’s not. This is the same thing.
I also love how the parent’s lawyer says "What they're trying to do here is teach (their son) a life lesson, which simply is that you fight for what's right.” While I agree that this is a teachable moment for their son, I totally disagree with the “lesson” that they are choosing. I don’t believe this is a “fight for what’s right” thing. I think that all this will teach him is that the rules don’t apply to him, and if you whine and bitch about it enough you can get your way. What they should be teaching him right now is to respect authority. This is middle school we’re talking about, if he can’t respect authority now how is he ever going to survive in a working environment? What’s he going to do when his future boss tells him that it’s not acceptable for him to wear sweats to work? He’s going to sue them. Because that’s what his parents taught him to do.
In my school everyone knew the rules coaches had set for teams. If you were going to be on the baseball team you knew you had to get your hair buzzed off at the beginning of the season. Lax boys got Mohawks. It’s about uniformity and looking like a team. Yes, these kids are “conforming,” but that’s a team. Teams are about giving up individuality for sake of the group. There is no I in TEAM!
Oh PS: the parents are suing for “unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, along with attorney fees.” Can someone please inform me what they’re being compensated for? And what was damaged? And why the heck should the school pay for the attorney when it’s the parents’ choice to sue the school in the first place? And people complain about schools not having money, this is why!
-Facepalm #2-
The censoring of Huck Finn. Seriously. Wtf. One of the greatest examples of American literature buy one of the greatest American novelists of all time is being censored. A book that over a hundred years after being published, ten movie adaptations, one musical, two anime series, two plays, three spin off books, two songs, and countless other pop culture references. What. The. Fuck.
Here are some OBVIOUS reasons the N word as well as the word Injun (at the time of the story, slang for Indian)
1. The language of any book is a reflection of the times. At the time of this book those were commonly accepted terms. This should be a teaching moment, to show kids how far we have come (and discuss how far we have left to go) in the way of race equality.
2. We cannot sweep racism under the rug. Mark Twain wrote about racism and the use of what are now considered racial slurs to highlight the ignorance and stupidity of racist ideology. This is a teaching moment people!
3. Three words: freedom of speech.
4. A word only has as much power as we give it. By removing it from a one of the greatest American novels ever written we are saying it is more important that the messages the book teaches. We are giving the word unlimited power. We are feeding the beast of racism.
5. One of the earliest arguments to have this book banned was because it was deemed “sympathetic to slavery”
6. Replacing the “n word” with the word “slave” is incredibly inaccurate. By doing this the publishers are perpetuating the myth that the only slaves that have ever existed were African American, and the only people who have ever owned slaves are Caucasian.
§ The first American slave owner was a black man.
§ 3 out of 4 colonial slaves were white.
§ Between the 16th and 18th centuries one to one and a quarter million European Christians were enslaved in North Africa
7. IT’S MARK FUCKING TWAIN DOUCHE BAG.
Thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment