Why Hasn’t George Zimmerman Been Arrested?

Trayvon Martin - Million Hoodies March 2012 020 (Photo credit: calvinfleming)

For the same reason that some many people dislike President Obama, because Trayvon Martin was black.  From the reports coming from law enforcement in Florida that is what all the evidence is pointing to; and that is a rather sad realization.   It is rather sad that in the year 2012 we are still dealing with the same bullshit that was going on pre-1960.  There is really no need for it, George Zimmerman needs to be arrested and charge with killing Trayvon and have his day in court in front of a jury of his peers.

This really has nothing to do with self-defense or “stand your ground”, it has to do with the fact that the victim was black and wearing “hoodlum” clothing.  Even with cases of self-defense people are still arrested and charged and have to go to court.  So, Sanford, FA. when are you going to arrest George Zimmerman?  The entire nation wants to know.  We sit  here day in and day out hearing bullshit stories and reasoning from the so called law enforcement people down there and yet justice is severely lacking in this situation.

While I do not agree with what the New Black Panthers are doing, I can understand why they feel the need to post the bounty, and it is only going to continue until Zimmerman is arrested. Personally, I am glad that I do not leave anywhere near Sanford, FA. at this time.  I am not saying that as I am ashamed of the community, I would be fearful for my safety.  The pot is boiling down there and it is only a matter of time before it boils over and some serious events start occurring.

We have all seen the various images and posts on Facebook; one that particularly sticks with me says “It’s called Neighborhood Watch; You do not watch with a gun.”  That is so true, it says it all right there.  No one can convince me that Zimmerman was not looking for a fight, he wanted a chance to prove how big and bad he was and boy did he get it.  And now the police and prosecutors are covering up for him; while folks that blanket will only stay in place for so long before a stiff breeze comes along and tears it away and when it does it won’t be just George Zimmerman going down for the count.  You are going to see some major changes in law enforcement overall in Sanford.

I truly believe there are good people in that city, indeed some in the law enforcement circle that are being affected by this because of the bad apple syndrome.  I feel sorry for those good people because typically it is the ones like that them suffer for the bad peoples actions.  I’ve seen reports where the police wanted a warrant to arrest Zimmerman but it was denied to them, why is that?  Does Zimmerman have connections that have not been revealed to us?  Is he a police informant and they do not want the information he provides them to go away?

I hate using the word conspiracy, but it does seem to fit in here.  As more time passes on this, that is what it is going to turn into.  The clock for taking care of this properly is slowly ticking down and once it reaches zero there is going to hell to pay for law enforcement in Sanford and it is not going to be pretty at all.  Each morning I wake up hoping to read that Zimmerman has been arrested, however it has not happened yet.  At this point, realistically, I honestly expect to read that he has been killed before I ever see a story about him being arrested or charged.

 

Related articles

• Surveillance video shows no blood or bruises on George Zimmerman (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
• Who Is George Zimmerman? (miami.cbslocal.com)
• Questions, answers about neighborhood shooting (hosted.ap.org)
• ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws Promote Vigilante Mentality (usnews.com)
• New Black Panther Party Offers $10,000 For George Zimmerman (inquisitr.com)

The Position Starts at $15.45 An Hour; Now, What’s Your Facebook Login?

As this issue is making the rounds, I felt it was time to get my own unique input into the matter.  The concept of employers asking for applicants Facebook, and other social network, login and password is quite frightening to me.  What really scares the shit out of me is that they find it acceptable to do so; seriously, someone on high decided this was going to be the new hiring practice and sent it percolating down through the levels.

Let’s skip over the whole 1984 aspect of this, I am quite sure there are plenty of conspiracy theorist out there already talking about it, and move on into the practical matter of it, shall we?  While some might agree that it is fine for employers to ask for this information, let’s just into the WABAC Machine and travel back to the late 1980′s early 1990′s.  Suppose someone interviewing you for a job asking for a key to your home so that they could check to verify that you were not an alcoholic, drug addicted or had questionable porn movies in your collection (or even movies copied from retail VHS tapes).  How would you react to that?  You’d be rather pissed off would you not?  So what is the difference when it comes to the social media sites?  For me, there is no difference.  Granted they are not a tangible item, they are out on the internet and I do allow people to look at the information I post, although I do have my privacy settings set to a good level; however, they do not need to be getting inside my Facebook to see what they can find, they can bookmark my profile and read it like everyone else with their level of visibility is allowed to, job be damned.  In all honesty I would not want to work for a company that wanted to invade my privacy like that–are they also going to check each day to make sure I am wearing gender appropriate under-garments?

I can say that when it comes to jobs related to children, teachers and the like, something like this makes theoretical sense, however it is still a major invasion.  It is assuming guilt before the fact and only suits to anger people.  Forget about a company having to worry about another company offering better benefits or competitive pricing, all your competition has to do is promise employees it will never spy upon their internet activity outside of company functions and your business is screwed.

From the looks of things cooler heads are going to prevail and “the law”, for lack of a better term, is going to step in and prevent employers from asking for this information, which I am very thankful for indeed.  If employers were allowed to continue along this path, it is not hard to imagine a scenario where they ask applicants to bring in their personal computers so that they companies IT experts so sift through everything to make sure there is nothing of a questionable nature on the machine.

Related articles

• Should Employers Be Allowed to Ask for Your Facebook Login? – Alexis Madrigal – Technology – The Atlantic (gds44.wordpress.com)
• You need my Facebook login information? No Problem! (blurbmyenthusiasm.wordpress.com)
• Prospective Employees Are Now Being Asked for Facebook Login Details [Wtf] (gizmodo.com)
• Would You Hand Over Your Social Network Login Details At A Job Interview? (techfleece.com)
• Two US senators ask the Attorney General to investigate employers asking for Facebook logins (theverge.com)
• That doesn’t mean your employer can use your Facebook password (erratasec.blogspot.com)
• Your privacy – can an employer ask for your Facebook login and password? (ravenit.com)
• Stop at the Intersection of Job Application and Facebook Login (virginiaworkplacelaw.com)
• Facebook Says: No Employers No! (theurbanmen.com)
• Prospective Employees Are Now Being Asked For Facebook Login Details (gizmodo.com.au)
• The Facebook job test: Now interviewers want your logins (go.theregister.com)

What Is Meant By The Term ‘Survivor’?

No, I am not talking about the CBS reality show or the band, what I am talking about is someone that survives another person in death.  As you see in so many obituaries–”John Smith is survived by his wife Joan, 5 children and his brother.”  In that context we are clearly referring to someone that is alive before the person in question died, seems rather simple doesn’t it?  I thought so as well and it would after all seem like common sense, until I came across the story about Karen Capato.

Now, clearly science has advanced in leaps and bounds since these original laws were written, it still begs the question, are these children eligible for survivor benefits?  While they are clearly his biological children, there is a lot of room for argument in this issue.  On the one hand if we were to examine this from the stance of when a marriage ends than yes, they are entitled to the benefits as there are plenty of instances where a marriage ends in divorce, or the parents were never married, and the children are still eligible for the benefits.  However, in that instance those children are alive before the deceased parent passed away.  This case is now before the Supreme Court and it will be interesting to see how the justices rule because there really is nothing in the Constitution that applies to this situation, it is unique in so many ways.

While I can empathize with the Ms. Capato for wanting to have more children by her husband, to carry on his name and what not, however if the justices were to rule in her favor this would open the door to a lot of potential abuse.  The court is faced with so many things it needs to figure out in this case that it literally boggles the mind.  As this article highlights, they are being forced to redefine established terms about what defines a child, a parent and even conception.  However, this cased is ruled now that it has been brought out into the spotlight it is going to become an issue of debate as there are soldiers who leave specimens behind before they deploy in case something happens and they want their wives to have children.

Related articles

• Babies Born After Daddy Dies Cannot Collect Daddies Social Security Benefits. (judgelondonsteverson.wordpress.com)
• Do Dead Dad’s Babies Deserve Benefits? (abcnews.go.com)
• Justices at odds over benefits for child conceived after death of a parent (cnn.com)
• Court: Benefits for babies born after dad’s death? (mercurynews.com)
• One More Look At The Posthumous Conception Case (julieshapiro.wordpress.com)

Of Webcams and College Humor

I have been off my game the last few weeks when it comes to this blog; I blame a ton of school work as the semester winds down as well as repeated sickness in the house.  One story I have not had the chance to comment on yet is the Tyler Clementi incident.  I really wish I could have because now I am left with attempting to sum up everything I am feeling in one blog post, never an easy task, however I will try my best.

While checking my news feeds this morning I came across this article, obviously written from a Conservative perspective, in fact I had to double check to make sure the author was not my father, it pissed me off to no end.  Mr. Cohen fails to take into consideration one thing that firmly proves the need for hate crime laws–the fact that these groups of people would be targeted with impunity if the laws did not exist!

I am convinced that Dharun Ravi knew full well what was going on and like a typical college kid wanted to embarrass his roommate.  It happens all the time and hence why there are no standards in place to prevent hazing and the like.  The internet and technology have taken bullying to a whole new height as demonstrated in this case and as was reflected in the movie American Pie this could have easily been streamed to the entire student body, or even further.

Much like a rape case, it does not matter how many sexual partners Clementi had, it is irrelevant to the issue at hand; it is only being mentioned because he is *GASP* gay.  Plain and simple.  The fact is he was harassed by his roommate Ravi and already being in a precarious state because of his sexuality he chose suicide.  I am very much reminded of the novel Another Country by James Baldwin in which the main character commits suicide from the same bridge in the first chapter of the book because he is just as unable to deal with his emerging sexuality.  Even in this day and age, despite all the changes, it is still hard for a youth to come to terms with their own sexuality, made all the more difficult by intolerant and ignorant peers.

I am sorry Richard Cohen, you and your Tea Party ways may think that hate crime laws are over the top and extreme but they do fulfill the purpose they were intended to, to prosecute those that commit hate crimes!  Go Figure!  Hate crimes by themselves are a different kind of crime because of their nature; if someone is targeted because of their gender, sexuality, race, origin, etc. then there should be additional penalties assigned to the crime, it is only fair.  As for Mr. Cohen’s argument about whether or not it had been a heterosexual encounter–I still think we would have heard about it where the end result was a suicide.  This is a very charged and aware climate we are living in these days and people need to be aware of their actions before they make them; not only are they ruining another persons life, but their own as well.

 

Related articles

• Tyler Clementi’s Webcam Spying Roommate Convicted of Hate Crime (alternet.org)
• Does Webcam Spying Really Deserve A Ten-Year Prison Sentence? – Forbes (forbes.com)
• Hate Crime Laws Are Overkill (newser.com)
• Ronnie Polaneczky: Was N.J. bias case a just verdict? (philly.com)
• Tyler Clementi case: webcam spy student is ‘curious kid, not a homophobic bully’ (telegraph.co.uk)
• BREAKING: Former Rutgers Student Found Guilty in Webcam Spying Suicide Case (themoderatevoice.com)
• Tyler Clementi Case: Prosecution Calls BS On Dharun Ravi’s Cover Up Tweets (perezhilton.com)
• Bullying and Hate Crimes (feministlawprof.wordpress.com)
• RUTGERS WEBCAM SUICIDE CASE: Dharun Ravi GUILTY of Hate Crime, Invasion of Privacy (blippitt.com)
• In Defense of Tyler Clementi’s Roommate, Dharun Ravi (bilerico.com)

Florida Just Keeps Disappointing Me

I have been following the events concerning Trayvon Matin and George Zimmerman for a while now and I guess it is time I through my two bits into the ring.  Regardless of the fact that Zimmerman may or may not be Hispanic, this is a case of racism pure and simple.  Zimmerman saw a black kid walking in a gated community and immediately flashed to every poor cop show he ever saw on TV and became Barney Fife.  Despite the fact that 911 told him to do nothing, to not approach the person he saw, he did anyway.  Now seriously, if I am approached by someone that starts hassling me and giving me a hard time and they do not identify themselves as law enforcement, I am going to tell them to fuck off; twice if they keep at it.

Is it any wonder that the FBI has stepped in to assume control of this investigation now?  The good-ole-boy police department down there in Sanford, Florida sure aren’t doing anything about it.  “Oh, we are looking in to it.”  Oh bullshit, please.  That screwed up stand your ground law you have down there was a clusterfuck waiting to explode and guess what, it just did.  Someone took it upon themselves to shoot someone else without being on their own property or being faced with deadly force and now y’all are ready to let him get away with it.

No, I do not know all the facts of this case, no one does, that is my point.  However, this is not being handled properly and if it is not taken care of properly there is going to be hell to pay, mark my words.  People will not sit idly by and let themselves be shot just for being somewhere that someone does not want them to be; or even worse as I already described, someone is accosted by a stranger and tells them to fuck off and is then shot for it, what a load of crap.

George Zimmerman is a dumbass that was looking for a fight.  Mostly reminds me of that gun nut whacko in the movie Highlander, unable to get anywhere else so he takes it upon himself to patrol the streets and “do good” as he sees fit.  Zimmerman was the instigator of this event, all the evidence we have been shown points to this; nothing about Trayvon’s past, present, size or what-not matters, Zimmerman instigated a confrontation in hopes of…  well I would like to say just showing off his big old gun but I think he really wanted to kill himself a black man.

Related articles

• What If Trayvon Martin Was Standing HIS Ground? (candidobservation.wordpress.com)
• Travyvon Martin, Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” Law, and Gun Laws (reason.com)
• Did Trayvon Martin’s Shooter George Zimmerman Use a Racial Epithet When Calling 911? (reason.com)
• At 17 yrs old, Trayvon Martin “Stood His Ground”. (wireblog00.wordpress.com)
• Florida college students want Trayvon Martin shooter arrested (thegrio.com)
• What Everyone Should Know About Trayvon Martin (1995-2012) | ThinkProgress (tinfoilhatman45.wordpress.com)
• Judge, Jury and Executioner (kenyatta2009.wordpress.com)
• Florida Teen Trayvon Martin: Case To Go To Grand Jury Over Orlando Killing (ibtimes.com)
• Trayvon Martin: Sanford police acting like de facto defense team for George Zimmerman (thegrio.com)
• Trayvon Martin’s Murder: Was the Motive Self-Defense or Racism? (newsfeed.time.com)
• Trayvon Martin: All This Has Happened Before and Will Happen Again [Trayvon Martin] (gawker.com)
• Trayvon Martin’s Final Moments (thedailybeast.com)
• Help prosecute the killer of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin (brownsugarlife.com)
• Trayvon Martin’s Girlfriend: I Told Him to Run (newser.com)
• Lawrence O’Donnell On Zimmerman 911 Tape: ‘I Believe What We Have Here Is Evidence Of A Police Cover-Up’ (mediaite.com)
• Why Did Trayvon Martin Die? (blogcritics.org)
• Justice Dept. Investigating Florida Killing After Outcry – New York Times (nytimes.com)
• Trayvon Martin asked shooter why he was following him moments before being shot dead: lawyer (news.nationalpost.com)
• Will There Be Justice For Trayvon Martin? (thefrisky.com)
• Can Social Media Bring Justice for Trayvon Martin? (mashable.com)
• Fmr. Homicide Detective: Illegal to Kill Dogs but Not Black Kids in Florida (crooksandliars.com)
• Seriously, what the hell is wrong with Sanford, Florida? (culturedsavages.com)
• Lawyer: Fla. teen slain while talking on phone to girlfriend (usatoday.com)
• Trayvon Martin death: parents call on FBI to take over case as anger grows – The Guardian (guardian.co.uk)

Let’s Talk About The Constitution

So, how many of you have actively read the United States Constitution?  I would imagine not many really, it is after all a very dense document and open to many different interpretations.  While I am not going to evaluate the entire document, there are some key points that I do want to address.  I suppose the best place to start is with religion and what the Constitution says about it.  Would you be surprised by the fact that the base text, this does not include Amendments, have very little mention of religion.  In fact the only direct mention to religion is in Article VI section 3: “but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”  That’s it, really go look it up that is all that is there.

Now, some may argue with me about Article VII where it states “the year of our Lord.”  Well, let’s put that to rest rather quickly, that has no overt religious bearing at all.  In fact it was the common way of referencing the year, much in the same way you will see A.D. on the year now.  Which incidentally A.D., or Anno Domini, means “the year of our Lord.”  In the 1700s this was the way of formally dating important documents, nothing more.

It would behoove anyone that chooses to argue about the Constitution to really study it.  The bits and pieces that we hear in various arguments are taken out of context and one really needs to study the text to understand for themselves what the intentions of the drafters were.

The Amendment system is simply atrocious.  Although we have only ever overturned one amendment in the history of our Constitution there are many that should never have had to be amendments, if not for the conflicting values of society at the time; such as the abolition of slavery, civil rights and women’s suffrage.  It is easy to see why it will take a Constitutional amendment to make marriage equality a fact in this nation as every individual is trying to impose their own value system on everyone else, and that is not how this country was designed to be.

The purpose of our Constitution was to establish the role of the federal government as well as the rights and responsibilities of the people.  It has since become a crutch that people use willy-nilly to support any action they deem worthy.  Not every issue needs to be a Constitutional issue; most can be resolved by applying simple common sense.  Unfortunately in this country common sense is quite the rare drop and until such time that people can think clearly without imposing their own values we will never live up to the dream imagined by the drafters of the Constitution.

Related articles

• Liberals really do not get the First Amendment (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
• Religious test, religious rights (bokertov.typepad.com)
• Letter: Constitution specifies no religious test for president, so avoid it in governing (tcpalm.com)
• The US Constitution and Its Amendments: Shaping and Reshaping America (atransitoryyes.wordpress.com)
• The Separation of Church and State: An Essential Principle (victorhugg.wordpress.com)
• The United States Constitution in Simple English Now Available (prweb.com)

Why Do Christians Only Support Parts of the Bible?

Over the years I have often wondered about just this topic.  If, as Christians claim, the Bible is supposed to be the word of God, why only follow some parts of it?  Wouldn’t it stand to reason that they person that follows only what they choose would in fact be the bigger sinner than one who does not follow the word at all?  I don’t know the answer to that, perhaps it is just my own critical thinking peeking through on this.  Just as we cannot choose what parts of the Constitution we follow as a nation, at least here in the US, so it stands to reason that a religion should not be able to choose what parts of their sacred text they follow…  or perhaps that is the dichotomy of religion–after all it is based on a mysterious figure in the sky doling out the rules of how one should act.

Christians are so worried about protecting marriage when it comes to marriage equality for the homosexual community, however they take no heed to what the Bible says about divorce.  Seems if you want to protect marriage you would want to do it all the way around and not just be half-assed about it.  I could go on and on about biblical contradictions or just other oddities in the Bible, however I won’t as it has been all done before and that information is easily found.

What I want to think about here, and hope you will join me, is how religion is used by some, not all, to back stop what they find personal offense with.  It is almost impossible to sway people to follow you when you are lecturing about something that is offensive to you personally, however if you back it up with a religious belief, or a mutation thereof, then you can easily sway people to follow you.  History shows us that religion has been the cause of more conflict, hate and wars than any other consideration out there.

If you are going to have a belief system you should follow it in total, not pick and choose the parts that appeal to you.  This modern day concept of Christianity is nothing more than an excuse to discriminate against people while hiding behind God, if Jesus were an actual entity I do not think he would be proud of what his message has been turned into.  Religion, no matter which one, should never be used as a tool of hate.  It should not be used to condemn and ostracize our fellow men.  History is full of examples of religious extremism, such as The Crusades and The Inquisition, and yet the lessons from history are never seemed to be learned.  So many of the “villains” throughout history have claimed to be working for the will of God and yet look at the evil they did?

As much as I have stated before that the best thing we can do for humanity is to get rid of religion in its entirety, I know that will never happen.  However, I will send this message to Christians everywhere, really read your Bible, heed all of the lessons it has to offer and use your own mind to see if it is for you.  If you find that it is, then I challenge you to live by your Bible, in its entirety and not just cherry picking the parts that appeal to you the most.  Can you do that?  I doubt you can.

Related articles

• Inventing religion (onefuriousllama.com)
• The Year Of The Bible (truelogic.wordpress.com)
• Welcome to common-f’ing-sense. (commonfingsense.wordpress.com)
• A Christian Girl and Her Opinion About Same Sex Marriage (marlenebertrand.wordpress.com)
• Anti-Gay Christians: Hopeless or Reachable? (biblethumpingliberal.com)
• The Sad State of Marriage (bcmom.livejournal.com)
• Atheists Question Catholics (dauntlessblogger.wordpress.com)
• Study: Christian Republicans Agree With Taliban – Against American Freedom (truelogic.wordpress.com)
• Gay Marriage: Listen to your head and heart, not the Bishops’ bluff and bluster (queeringthechurch.com)

When Old Laws Come Back To Haunt You

For anyone that has spent any amount of time on the internet I am sure that you have come across websites that host some amount of dumb and/or obscure laws.  I have and I find some of them to be quite humorous at times, both for the fact that they are still on the books and the fact they ever had to be established in the first place.  I know why they are still on the books:  it is cheaper to keep them there and ignore them than it is to go through the process of removing them.

Considering the events happening with Rush Limbaugh I am betting at this point that someone had spent the money to remove a certain law from the books in Florida.  I am of course referring to the law that Gloria Allred is using to file a lawsuit against Limbaugh.  Basically, the law in question makes it  illegal to make any comments that questions the chastity of a woman, married or unmarried.  As everyone knows, with the comments of “slut” and “prostitute” that Rush threw out, they fall well within the guidelines of that law.

So we are faced with basically two arguments about this issue, do we prosecute Rush or not?

• Well, on one hand I say yes of course, the law is on the books, he clearly violated it, and as no one is above the law he should be charged and tried.
• On the other hand, it is rather obvious this is an old, religious based, law that really has no place in modern society so why should we waste taxpayer dollars on this?

This is an interesting can of worms, I must say.  I really cannot recall another instance where someone decided to use a leftover law in a serious manner, so it will be interesting to see where this goes.  Do I think it is going to go somewhere?  Of course I do, this issue is much to volatile to allow it to just burn out and Gloria Allred is outspoken enough that she will not sit by and let prosecutors ignore it.  I expect we will soon see formal charges brought up against Limbaugh, however, where it goes from there I really have no idea.  Plea bargain, before a judge, in front of a jury?  I say flip a coin and call it, although I will add, if this does go before a jury I think Ole Rush is screwed as people are rightly so pissed off about this.  Limbaugh has gotten away with a lot of vile talk for a long time and it looks like karma has finally caught up with him.

With all the advertisers abandoning Limbaugh as well as radio stations dropping his shows, it seems clear his days are numbered now.  I must admit I am getting a chuckle out of the companies that are looking to fill the ad space; one for adulterers and another that connects sugar daddies with gold diggers, seems right up Rush’s alley and I am left to wonder why he is refusing them; one would think any ad would be better than the dead air they are facing now.

I will be keeping an eye on this and will most likely be posting about it again, let’s see where this goes shall we my readers?

Related articles

• Gloria Allred takes on portly pundit Rush Limbaugh with defamation charge (lameducks.wordpress.com)
• Rush Limbaugh Broke An (Obscure) Florida Law Against Slut-Shaming (thefrisky.com)
• Gloria Allred to West Palm Beach prosecutor: You really should go after Rush, you know (hotair.com)
• An open letter to Gloria Allred – Tea Party Nation (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Gloria Allred: Prosecute Rush Limbaugh for defamation (thegrio.com)
• Rush Limbaugh’s Fluke comments violated law, Allred says (abclocal.go.com)
• Gloria Allred Calls for Criminal Prosecution of Rush Limbaugh (volokh.com)
• Lawyer: Prosecute Rush Limbaugh for defamation (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Gloria Allred Wants Old Law Used To Prosecute Limbaugh (lezgetreal.com)
• Gloria Allred Seeks Criminal Prosecution of Rush Limbaugh for Calling a College Student a “Slut” (lesliebrodie.wordpress.com)
• Rush Limbaugh: Gloria Allred Wants Florida DA To Investigate ‘Slut’ Slur (ibtimes.com)
• Gloria Allred to West Palm Beach prosecutor: You really should go after Rush, you know (gunnyg.wordpress.com)

Conservatives and Liberals and the Concept of Free Speech

Image via Wikipedia

Rightly so people are upset about the comments made by Rush Limbaugh directed towards Sandra Fluke, and by implication towards all women.  Petitions are flying across the internet, advertisers are leaving the show and radio stations are either taking down the show or contemplating it.  However, Conservatives out there are screaming hypocrisy because no one took these same kinds of action against Bill Maher for his comments.  Conservatives are also accusing Liberals of trying to stifle “Free Speech”, well let’s just take a look at this, shall we.

First let’s address the issue of Bill Maher, to that I ask where were the Conservatives circulating petitions and raising awareness on Twitter, Facebook and the like?  Just because the Liberals of America are able to recognize a problem and come together to work towards resolving it does not indicate hypocrisy, it merely highlights the fact that Conservatives do not in fact care about individual liberties and rights.  Conservatives care about the bottom dollar and keeping everyone in line, the concepts of liberty and freedom are abstractions to them and only apply when their plans fall apart.

We, the people trying to get Rush off the airwaves, are not trying to shut down Free Speech, we are attempting to get rid of hate speech.  It does not matter to me what any court says, hate speech is not Free Speech and should not be protected as such.  The only intent of hate speech is to add fuel to a specific fire and get people to take radical actions to maintain some status quo.  I fully believe in the concept of Free Speech, however it is not what people assume it to be most of the time.

If the only way Rush Limbaugh can hold his audience’s attention is by attacking people who do not fit into his acceptable mold, named White Anglo Saxon Protestant Males, then perhaps it is time for him to go the way of the Dodo.  There is never a place for personal attacks, attacks based on gender, sexuality or race.  Why are we so accepting of the presence of hate speech?  We should be doing everything we can to shut it down, and no this is not a slippery slope, it merely takes a fair amount of critical thinking and common sense in determining what hate speech is.  Signs saying God hates Fags, Thank God for Dead Soldiers…  those are clearly hate speech, as is Rush Limbaugh and his ilk.  Oh, and just to clarify, I do consider some of the Left leaning talking heads to be guilty of hate speech as well, hence why I listen to none of them.

 

Related articles

• Rush Limbaugh: Loss of ads amounts to ‘a couple of French fries’ (latimesblogs.latimes.com)
• Limbaugh tried to insult, but only got Fluked (marymind.wordpress.com)
• Jacoby: Rush needs better apology (bostonglobe.com)
• Rush Limbaugh Boycott Up to at Least 36 Advertisers (news.firedoglake.com)
• Deplorable Calls for Censorship and Double Standards For Rush Limbaugh (themoderatevoice.com)
• Hypocrisy For All To See And Hear (annem040359.wordpress.com)
• Rush Limbaugh Defended by Bill Maher in Wake of Sandra Fluke Scandal…Wait, What?! (eonline.com)
• Civility and Free Speech (pinkbananaworld.com)
• Apology Not Accepted (ariksavage.wordpress.com)
• Joshua Cranmer: Hate speech? Really? (quetzalcoatal.blogspot.com)
• The Left’s assault on free speech (oforchristsakes.wordpress.com)

Apparently Offensive Material is in the Eye of the Beholder

Image via Wikipedia

It rather bothers me that here we are in the year 2012 and yet both men and women have to constantly fight to escape predefined gender roles.  The two examples of this I want to focus on here are the new Huggies Dad Campaign and the cleaning tag found on the jeans by Emma Barnett–and in fact, it is not even the ads themselves I want to talk about, but the comments associated with them and the blatant lack of misunderstanding people have when it comes to gender based offensive material.  Now, in my opinion, the determination of whether or not something is offensive towards a gender is rather simple:  if it attempts to fit someone into a predefined gender role, it is offensive.  However, as it has been shown time and time again that people do not believe something unless there is a lot of text involved, I cannot simply end this post here, sadly.

Now, when someone like Rush Limbaugh comes along and calls Sandra Fluke, and by extension, all women sluts and prostitutes because they want birth control included in their health insurance most rational people understand this as being offensive and as we have seen action is taken against the offending person and their actions.  I am quite proud of the response to Rush’s comments and from what I can gather he is rather shocked at the events that have happened.  People are speaking out not just against him, which he deserves, but against gender stereotyping across the board.  However, the sad part is, it is the subtler experiences of offensive material that tend to slip through the cracks and garner responses such as “People need to lighten up” or “Come on, it’s all in good fun”.

When you have ads that place a person into a predefined gender role, you are creating an offensive situation.  Especially now that we are in 2012, it is important to understand that aside from certain biological functions, there really isn’t any activity that one gender can do better than another.  Fathers are just as good at being the homemaker as the mother are, in fact I am a stay at home dad myself and find it to be a very rewarding experience, and women make just as good soldiers as men for the simple fact that patriotism, and a desire to defend your home, does not come with an anatomical requirement.

It really does sadden me that the more we move forward as a society, the more our belief system moves backwards.  Equality is quickly becoming a belief system that does not accurately reflect its own name.  Equality applies to everyone, regardless of gender, color or sexuality.  Especially when it comes to gender offensive material, both men and women are guilty of perpetuating predefined gender roles.  Considering taking the trash out to be man’s work or dishes and laundry being the job of a wife are really beneath us as a society.  Anyone is capable of doing any of the household tasks that are required; a family is supposed to be a team with everyone working together to manage the household and make it function as it should.

Jean Kilbourne’s Killing Us Softly project is a great example of alerting people to the amount of gender bias that is in the media.  Both women and men are portrayed as having to fit into a certain model, well the shocking thing is average people don’t.  I would much rather see advertisements depicting real people, with all their many flaws, than these seemingly perfect examples that are put forth to us.  Real people have curves, extra weight on their body, imperfections in appearance and what not.  Not all women are skinny with large breasts and it is also true that not all men have six-pack abs or seemingly monstrous packages.

This is not merely about “lightening up” or “having a sense of humor”, it is debasing to all genders and should not be allowed to continue.  The standards that are being put into place for males and females lead to confusion, and sometimes anger, later in life when people realize they are not acting in a manner that society says they should be.  We are all unique individuals and should be allowed to act as such.  We can no longer choose what we are offended by, it is an all or nothing situation, and I would much rather see it swing towards the all end of things than going back to the standard where everyone is expected to fit into predefined gender roles.

Related articles

• Rush Limbaugh isn’t the only moron out there, unfortunately (freethoughtblogs.com)
• It’s About Being Yourself and Objectifying Women (amandatheatheist.wordpress.com)
• Gender Roles in Superhero Culture (offoxesandhedgehogs.wordpress.com)
• Is gender labels important in establishing a child’s identity? (offoxesandhedgehogs.wordpress.com)
• The Woman Warrior &Ndash; Reality Versus Fantasy (socyberty.com)
• Gender (kaapvaal.wordpress.com)