Friday, June 03, 2011

The "New" Bigotry

Someone on facebook just shared a recent news article about a gay softball association who, according to a judge, is allowed to limit the number of straight players on their team.

The link is found here:

Boy, can you imagine what it would be like if the tables were turned?  I understand that gay people can be treated unfairly.  But what if there was a "straight" league?  And what if that league was given legal persmission to limit the number of gay players on the team?  There would be rioting in the streets!  There would be broken glass and stomping high-heels and pumps everywhere!  (If that offends you, and you can't see the humor in that, then you probably don't want to continue reading)

See, this is the culture-shift that has been happening over the past decades.  If you were once a marginalized group, suddenly you have super-rights and people who disagree with you are considered "old fashioned" at best, but "bigots" more than likely.  If you are one of those in a group that was formerly marginalized (or even still marginalized to some degree), it isn't enough for you to say that people disagree with you -now there is something wrong with people who disagree with you, and they deserve to be pointed out and ostracized for not bending over (no pun intended).

Consequently, there is immense pressure on "conservative" people who were once "mainstream" to soften their convictions.  Instead of saying, "That is wrong," it is more politically correct for us to say, "I personally disagree with that, but it is ok if you do it."  Why the double standard?  That is a good question, but apparently the old mainstream owes everyone something for all of that oppression by people who are either now dead or too old to move.  I'm not saying there aren't racists and gay-haters still out there.  Of course there are, and they are wrong -and notice that I can say they are WRONG without anybody flipping out.  What I'm saying is that if you disagree with a pro-gay agenda, for example, you are labeled a gay-hater as a way to silence you, condemn you, get people against you, and pressure you to conform. 

This is the "new" bigotry.  It is dressed up all pretty, with smiles and colorful rainbows, in the name of "tolerance," but underneath it is the same human problem as the old bigotry.  But now these people have an axe to grind, and we had better shut up or get out of the way, or there is going to be hell to pay.

I recently watched an episode of Grey's Anatomy where the two lesbian characters were supposed to get married, but one of the characters had no support from the parents.  The father was iffy, and the mother was way out there.  The way the mother was portrayed was laughable.  There are no doubt people out there like that, but she was portrayed as a fundamentalist Christian bigot, a hostile, hateful, condeming, "you are going to hell" freak, as if that is what all people are like who are "religious" and disagree with gay marriage.  It was a not-so-subtle jab in the ribs toward the religious-right.

Imagine if there was a show that went the opposite way?  Can you imagine a not-so-subtle jab toward the liberal left, pointing out how intolerant and bigoted it can be to demonize people who disagree with gay marriage?  First of all, people would be calling the network asking for the show to be pulled and for a public apology.  Second of all, few people would really get it.  So, what would be the point?  To me, there was nothing incredibly ballsy about Grey's Anatomy doing that.  The tide of the culture, as a whole, is already in that direction. 

It is like an angsty teenage boy deciding that he wants to grow his hair long, wear all black, and listen to loud music.  Gee -way to be "different" among the legions of other teenage boys doing the exact same thing!  But like teenage boys, the point for them is not to be unique from others like them.  It is to be unique from the "old way" of seeing things.  If one boy stands out and rebels against the rebellion, saying, "No, I want to be just like my parents," he isn't praised for being unique.  He is ridiculed as a "dork."  It was never about uniqueness, only rebellion.  It is the same here. 

But this kind of thing isn't just with issues like gay-rights and gay-marriage.  I've found this same attitude prevalent especially with interaction about religious beliefs.  I remember posting some comments on a friend's facebook status message that were "Christian" in nature (my friend is a Christian, as well).  Another person, apparently not a Christian, didn't like what I and others had to say, and let us know.  When I replied, the person didn't reply to me -they addressed him but about me, dismissing me and calling me "closed-minded."  The common spirit of the age says this: "If you are a Christian, the proper response is to say, 'Well I disagree with you, but everyone is entitled to their own beliefs.'"  Meanwhile, there is nothing wrong with a non-Christian saying we are "closed-minded" for having certain convictions they disagree with.  Have you noticed how such an attitude immediately condemns the other person and ends the possibility for honest discussion?

So, if you are a white, heterosexual, Bible-believing Christian with certain convictions and moral values, you had better stock up on Chapstick, because the line of asses to kiss is getting longer and longer.  Heck, if you believe in heterosexual-only marriage and believe in staying committed to one person for a lifetime, you had better do the same.  You fuddy-duddy.

Have you ever noticed how that works?  It is common for people to say, "You shouldn't push your beliefs on people.  All beliefs are valid and all people should be able to believe whatever they want.  It is wrong and arrogant to claim that your beliefs are right."  There is a big problem.  That statment is a belief.  And it is a belief that the individual not only claims is right (while condemning others for doing the same thing) but is expecting others to accept.  If you don't accept it and play along?  You are "intolerant" -a very nasty insult, these days.  Hmm...  Sounds like yet another double-standard.  Oh yeah, cuz it is!  Cool.  I'm glad that is cleared up.

Am I trying to turn the tables, now, and get the same kind of special treatment and sympathy as others?  No.  That is the point.  I don't need special treatment, nor do I want it.  In fact, I might find it insulting because it would be implicitly saying that I'm too infantile to be treated as an equal.  But I guess some people like being catered to like babies.  I can handle it if someone thinks I'm wrong about my beliefs, and if I can't -if I feel the need to whine and cry about it, then that is my problem, isn't it?

No comments: