And because they might never pay off their student loans working crappier and crappier jobs, most likely never with full-time benefits, and all temporary, I give them the same break when they use the new business-speak "power" words whose only real power is to annoy anyone over 40, because they spend an undue amount of time writing resumes and going to interviews trying to bullshit their ways into their newest temporary jobs. Even if they're trying to be nice and say, "Dave, you are an impactful teacher. In the current educational environment, it will grow our school to action your suggestion and widen the scope of our teaching." I feel like saying, "Please! Save it for the Soma addicts." But I don't. Yet. I've been "thinking outside the box" and "kicking the tires" on a new strategy for "solutioning" this "challenge," and I've come up with a way to "up my game," a real "game changer!" I just get all Taoist on their asses. Woo Wei, baby! Action through inaction. When someone thinks they are impressing me with this unprofessional professionalism, even changing MY words, yes that sometimes happens, I think positively. In their own ignorant way they could be attempting to help me by changing my classical clarity to modern misdirection, so I do nothing. So far it's working.
But I admit to having a harder time adapting to this modern behaviour of happiness through offense. Not through offending, which I suppose could, heh heh, be called offensive offense. No, people only seem to be happy if they are feeling offended, defensive offense. Now, okay, I am pretty much constantly offended. But it's different. I am offended by things that are offensive mostly. I guess this statement loses some of its "impactfullness" when it's made directly after I was pussyaching about a few words people have fallen in love with, but my main offense is with the widening gap between rich and poor; impending world financial doom; destruction of the environment; war; distracting people from these real problems; keeping people uneducated so they don't know about these problems... I am usually not offended by songs, nationality terms, old English, people's personal choices, or things that have exactly nothing to do with me. I have opinions and will share them, but I try not to get offended and usually don't.
People nowadays DO! Wow, they can be militant, can't they? Over nothing! I guess when I was young, we were told, and we had more opportunity, to work things out for ourselves. If we were offended we dealt with it. We got over it. But then we couldn't post in chatrooms or Facebook or, ahem, on blogs. I remember hearing some phrases that seem to have gone out of style, "Mind your own business!" "Sticks and stones may break my bones..." "It just doesn't matter!"
Right on, Steve! So what are the examples I've been hearing about and seeing? Well back in the summer during Korea's 18th "Queer Fest," there were lots of people offended. This lady is holding a sign that translates to, "Homosexuality is against the law. It is God's judgment." Maybe it was only televised on the local TV channels because I didn't catch that court case on CNN. And if the participants in this alleged judgment were sworn in on the Bible, I have to question its validity. I'm not gay and I don't pretend to understand two-spirited people, but unless they're forcing themselves on ME, I am not offended. I really have no right to be offended, do I? They are not harming others. It's their business, not mine.
However, the Bible is something I know a little bit about and when people start shooting themselves in the foot ignorantly or deceitfully talking about how the Bible says this or that about something, and they're wrong, well, it's more offensive than gay people being gay. Folks, there are 31,000 verses in the Bible. 6 seem to be about homosexuality. Leviticus 18, I've always been told, says that man shouldn't lie down with man as with woman. It is called an abomination. Translators differ. Some say that Hebrew or Aramaic words used seem to condemn incestuous or adulterous homosexuality. Whatever the case, the verse goes on to condemn many other common actions, yes, even common to Christians, that evidently have lost their offense. Eating pork, trimming beards, wearing mixed materials, getting tattoos, touching a pig's skin to name a handful. And when you consider the lifestyles of righteous men in the Bible like David, Solomon, Abraham, Moses, Lot and Noah included polygamy, adultery, sexual slavery, incest, even giving virgin daughters to rapists, you begin to really wonder why Christians use the Bible as grounds for their offense against gay people.
And if a Christian, (as the word would imply), is supposed to act like Christ, what did the Lord have to say about gay people? Absolutely nothing, that's what. But statistically when Jesus fed the 5000, he fed at least 100 gay people with miracled bread and fish. He made the lame to walk and the blind to see, even turned water to wine but never does the Bible record Jesus "healing" a gay person or making them straight. So perhaps a better picture from a Korean anti-gay protest would be this one:
Songs. When the hell did people start listening to lyrics? Presumably when they became viable sources of that sweet, sweet righteous indignation. The national anthem of Canada. "True patriot love in all thy sons command." Canada is being sung unto here and the song says that the country commands true patriot (ic) love from all its sons. Well, maybe it did back in 1880... But things were different in Canada back then. In 1880, when "O Canada" was penned, people spoke, and certainly sang, differently. There was a lot of "thee" and "thy," both of which appear in our national anthem. And when somebody wanted to speak of all Canadians, he sometimes used a male pronoun. See what I just did there? Re-read that last sentence if you missed it. Nowadays in Canada, and other WOKE countries of the world, I just offended half the residents. And you'd better believe I'd be corrected! At least one person, not necessarily a woman, would point out that I actually meant, "And when somebody wanted to speak of all Canadians, he or she sometimes used a male pronoun." This began a long time ago in Canada. I remember many classes in late 80's, early 90's university when profs were instantly corrected with, "He or she!" several times a lecture. By feminists who may not have even been registered in the classes! Profs were annoyed into change. And the feminists won the national anthem battle as well. We now sing, "...in all of us command." Personally with all the other old words in there, I like it better with "all thy sons." It's more authentic. And actually more accurate since Canada doesn't inspire as much true, patriotic love in its sons and daughters any more. Plus if you want to really update it, change the thees to yous and maybe instead of "all of us," we could sing, "True patriot love in all our asses command." But then again, the "true North strong and free" is a huge stretch too. But whatever...
See that? "Whatever!" It rarely affects me. I haven't sung my anthem since the winter Olympics at the medal ceremony for Mike Kingsbury and I just used the old lyrics since it was what I had learned and was used to. I also removed my hat while some youngsters did not. Others around me sang it differently, some kept their toques on, and do you know what? I was not offended! I also hear it before hockey games and everybody is singing the new one. So what? I will tell you it bugs me, not offends, but bugs me more when people start getting all soully and going way off on overdramatic, off-tune adventures at the end of every line. It bugs me because they are holding the hockey fans hostage while they get all carried away and then accept all the applause as appreciation of their talent rather than thanks for shutting the hell up. I actually get a little offended, (because it's part of the distraction I mentioned above), that the anthem is sung at all. Not at the Olympics, it's appropriate there. But it's just out of place at most sporting events. But anyway, I don't give a crap. Let people sing it the way they want. Neither lyrics nor headwear etiquette hurt anyone if they are practiced in more than one way.
"Baby It's Cold Outside." What a kerfuffle! 1944 isn't as long ago as 1880, but it's a while ago. Languages evolve. They get new words and phrases added like the list above. And sometimes the meanings of old words or phrases change with cultures who speak those words or phrases. Imagine if folks all went out and started behaving like homosexuals at Christmas because they heard the line in "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas," that says, "Make the Yuletide gay." I say "imagine" because to my knowledge it has never happened. Folks seem to realize that "gay" back then meant happy and not homosexual. We're not removing it from radio stations or changing the lyrics. We're doing nothing. Action through inaction. It's a brilliant strategy, I'm telling you! This song was written in 1944. I think. So 74 years has passed since both of these songs came about. Do you suppose there may be a possibility that the line, "What's in this drink?" might have meant something different in 1944, and it's not a rapey, Rohypnol, roofie sort of song? Do you think maybe the best reaction could be to do nothing? I guess not, eh?
Here is a feminist's defence of the song. And it says the song was written way back in 1936! It's a pretty good argument for doing nothing. And what if we wipe this song out and never play it again? Are we saving even one person from date rape? Doubtful. It might even be wasting a pretty good opportunity for feminists to learn about female disenfranchisement back in the day being so bad that women couldn't even stay the night with a guy without blaming it on booze. So now feminists are fighting amongst themselves! Unfortunately, it wouldn't be the first perforation in the foot of feminism committed by an ever more militant and angry membership.
I read there was even a court case, a COURT CASE mind you, to decide whether the word "Kiwi" is offensive or inoffensive to New Zealanders. Kiwi Julie Savage argued that the term is "racial discrimination." Against the proud New Zealand RACE I suppose. Luckily a judge dismissed the nonsense, but she even had the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity acting on her behalf. Now, it WAS in Australia so there might have been a little Aussie-Kiwi rivalry at play, but really? Sticks and stones, Julie! Work it out! Now you might say, "Well if they're saying, 'Good morning, Kiwi,' that might be offensive." Yeah. True. And if they are, they're dicks. Get over it. You don't need to take long, hot showers with them, you just have to work with them. Bitch to your friends about them, blog about them, have a good box of Kleenex and tub of ice cream cry, don't go to court! If only all this rage could be usefully directed!
So what is the impetus for so much rage? Perhaps it's the feeling of power that comes with changing things. Changing national anthems, putting rapists in jail, making people choose their words more carefully... I am not against these things. In fact, a lot of douchebags have been exposed and that's a very good thing. All I am saying is there is a time for action and there is a time for inaction. When people are all emotional, drunk with power and accomplishment, they tend to jump to action a bit too quickly. And it's certainly not just the feminists. Republicans vs. Democrats; U.S. vs. Russia; Haves vs. Have-nots; Country vs. Country; Team vs Team; Man vs. Woman; Capitalist vs. Socialist; Liberal vs. Conservative; blue dress vs. gold dress; these are all dividing the world in a time when our planet's biggest problems absolutely require co-operation. People who encourage anger at small things to distract from proper anger at things we really SHOULD be angry at, well THEY offend me. THEY enrage me. They pull the puppet strings of most people on the earth keeping them busy fighting about secondary issues thereby distracting them from the main issues and all for one reason: to get even richer. It's almost like they are mad scientists experimenting on almost everybody on Earth creating distractions and useless anger outlets so that they will have a larger share of the world's wealth when it ceases to exist.
Incidentally, all those things that enrage me amount to basically the evils of money, greed and corrupt business, banks and politics. These are things Jesus DID mention in the Bible. Compared to 6 verses about homosexuality, there are over 2000 about the things I am most pissed off about. Jesus actually whipped money changers in the Temple. The concept of selling money has gone from viewed as evil or sick, to respectable. Natives in North America acknowledged 5 sexes, male, female, two-spirit male, two-spirit female and transgendered. That was quickly forced out of them by the invading Europeans with their "Christian" values. Natives also thought the white man's concepts of ownership, greed and acquisitiveness were nothing short of mental illness. But those values, in their tremendously NON-Christian glory, were forced onto the natives by the inferior culture despite what they professed to believe. Again, if only that rage were properly targeted!
And, despite all our rage, we are still just rats in cages.
