Freedom or Equality?

The many political and governmental issues I oppose stem around the lack of rights for workers, environmental issues and the lack of dollars spent on human services.  Employers are not entitled to give workers rest breaks, wages for social workers are low and services for the low income are shoddy.  Equality of wages and treatment of people are not priorities here like they are up North.  Texans drive trucks that would rival small semis and I have yet to see a recycle service at any place I have lived since moving here.  I have not seen much emphasis on the environment (with the exception being Austin).  They seem a gluttonous lot, caring little about minorities and the low income.

It is easy enough to write another rant about how much Texas sucks.  I could have (and already have) written a few words on the subject. I choose now to focus on the really great thing about Texas government, Freedom!

While one side of the ideology favors governmental assistance to support equality, the other side favors governmental assistance to support freedom.  Texans believe that personal freedoms should be supported by their government.  I can think of at least 1,000 reasons why wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle would be a good thing.  The fact that people even ride around on those things makes no sense to me.  In 1998 alone 500 lives were saved from the use of helmets.  The leading cause of death in motorcycle accidents is head trauma.  While this would seem like a good argument for helmet laws, Texans value freedom.  I appreciate this value in Texans.  The ability to make a personal choice can be empowering and makes a lot of sense to me.  Texas government strives to support personal choices when it comes to have freedom over your personal well being.

Another prime example of Texas government valuing personal freedom is laws regarding minor consumption of alcohol.  Minors can consume alcohol if in the presence of their parent and with their parent’s consent.  Although I do not (necessarily) condone underage drinking, I appreciate that Texas government has left a little of this choice up to the parents.  This freedom allows the parents to instill their parenting beliefs on their children rather than letting the government choose for them.  These parents may also believe as I do, that sometimes prohibiting things make those things more easily abused.  

The refreshing thing about Texas government is that it values a person’s right to make their own decisions.  The government strives to protect its citizens from over regulation of personal freedoms by the government.  The general attitude of “letting people be” resonates in the way that Texans treat each other; with kindness and goodwill, with respect and friendly smiles.  A more liberally minded government could stand to learn from some of these tactics.  Maybe Texans feel a sense of control over their choices.  Is that why people are nice to each other here?

What are Words Anyways?

 “When is ‘Gay’ Gay?” is a blog written by Bob Parks.  He argues that using the word “Gay” isn’t really that bad.  He claims that recently there has been uproar of the use of the word in a movie trailer.  The word Gay was used in a negative connotation but the Parks thinks it is no big deal. He claims that when the word is used in a derogatory manner that people can “automatically assume there is malice when in fact there is not”.  Park claims that there are two meanings to the word; one meaning homosexual and one meaning “rubbish or stupid”.

I believe Park’s intended audience is conservative and heterosexual . He is probably very appealing to republican racial minorities and uses this as an angle for his viewpoint on things. 

Park’s “proof” that using the word is not so bad is quoting the Flintstones song.  The Flintstones is 50 years old and at the end of the song they sing, “We’ll have a gay old time”.  That is hardly a derogatory use of the word Gay when that is how the word was used then.  The writer is arguing that since so many people use the word gay to describe something stupid or dumb, that it should be ok and socially accepted. 

Park goes on to say, “So, when did the meaning of the word change and why is everyone expected to have acknowledged the change (as few of us had any input)?”  Parks is claiming since the Gay community has taken ownership of the word (without his consent) that he ought to be able to use the word however he likes. Park’s general attitude is that Liberals need to be quiet and quit being so sensitive over the use of the word Gay to mean stupid or dumb.

There are many words that have varying meanings.  The word “Fag” has many different meanings; it can be a cigarette, a tire, a servant and a verb meaning to labor hard.  It can also be a derogatory term to describe a gay man.  “Dyke” has different meanings as well.  Is the author insinuating that it is ok to use whatever words we feel like it just because it has multiple meanings?  The author is inferring that the gay community needs to get over it and let people use the word gay to describe something stupid or rubbish.  He expects the gay community to adapt and accept what the dominant members of society find tasteful (hmmm…isn’t the gay community already doing that?).  The author’s “proof” of his opinion is flawed and ultimately is a way for him to justify oppression.

Playing devil’s advocate I can understand where the author is coming from.  Maybe he thinks the people in this country should “lighten up” and start becoming less “P.C.”  I think this is a valid point of view.  It can be exhausting keeping up with which labels are o.k. and which labels aren’t.  However, the word gay has been used for quite some time and is hardly a trend.

Ultimately the author’s opinion did not work.  He had little proof or evidence that the derogatory use of the word gay is alright.  He did not consult with any people in the gay community when forming his opinion.  It was a poorly written piece coming from a place of dominance and ignorance over the topic of sexual orientation.  With suicides rising in the gay community this is no time to be taking the things we say lightly.  I am left to ponder how the author would feel if we deemed it ok to start throwing the “N word” around?  Just a thought.