Although a mild patch—if
not the early onset of spring—would be quite welcomed right now, I
am not one to avoid the realities of season and location. I am not
retreating to my well-heated bedroom, donning a two-piece bathing
suit and sipping exotic drinks while The Beach Boys and Hawaiian
steel-guitar music reverberate from the stereo. Summer is summer and
winter is winter by my books. And my taste in music changes to suit
the weather, with The Cure, Joy Division and the early Doors taking
up long-term residence on my turntable and in my CD player this time
of year. ’Tis the season to be gothy, I say. My father also
recommends lots of classic ‘Kraut rock’ for the winter season. I
can see his point. Despite opening with a song about hallucinating
in the desert, Lonesome Crow, the Scorpions’ 1972 debut,
does sound very cold, desolate and windy.
I mentioned that I’m
not one to avoid reality. This is more than can be said for those MUN students who have been kicking up such a stink over computer-science professor John Shieh’s choice of topic for a recent assignment. Professor Shieh, so the story goes, asked his
students to design a computer program to calculate whether or not a
fictional rape victim named Heather was likely to commit suicide.
“Several” of his students, apparently, took offense at the
supposedly light handling of the dark subject matter, and
subsequently contacted the oversized prepubescents that comprise
MUN’s student union. The next thing you know, student union
representative Candace Simms is tattling to the media and all hell
breaks loose.
Candace Simms: shit disturber |
As you probably know by
now, after “consultations” with Mark Abrahams, the dean of the
science faculty, Professor Shieh has since apologized for his
‘wrongdoing’ and has substituted another topic for the computer
course assignment. Meanwhile, Candace Simms—as if every other
professor was backing her into a corner with her undies down—is
calling for all MUN instructors to receive mandatory sensitivity
training at the campus’s Sexual Harassment Office (?!!!). After a
little consideration, this might not be a bad idea, actually. The
instructors might start by changing Candace Simms’s diaper and
monitoring her television viewing.
Speaking of sex, I guess
all of us good Canadians are supposed to be avoiding coverage of the
2014 Sochi Winter Olympics like the plague right now. If we are to
listen to the whiny, self-righteous alarmists—like Warren Kinsella—who can’t see the forest for the trees, it would be
morally reprehensible of us not to. It appears that everybody’s
favourite homophobe this side of Fidel Castro, President Vladimir
Putin, has managed to push legislation through the Russian parliament
that effectively outlaws the exposure of adolescents to “homosexual
propaganda”, and even the Harper government is expressing its
disapproval. Really....
Since when have Stephen
Harper and company given a damn about gay rights and the autonomy of
youth sexuality? Remember, boys and girls, this is the government
who voted against gay-marriage legislation and raised legal ages for
nearly all aspects of intimacy in the name of “youth protection”
(ha!). These people are bigoted assholes and sexually jealous
hypocrites who secretly drool at the sight of young flesh. Please
keep this in mind as we approach the 2015 federal election—especially
if you are turning 18 and preparing to vote for the first time. In
the meantime, continued good luck to the Canadian athletes competing
in Sochi. At the time of my writing, Canada is in fourth place
with the medal count standing at four gold, five silver and three bronze.
And speaking of legal
ages, you may be interested to learn that Belgium, where euthanasia has been legal for adults since 2002, has become the first country to extend the right to die to children and adolescents. That’s
right—terminally ill Belgians under 18 can now consent to
euthanization provided it’s green-lighted by their parents. It’s
too bad the Belgian government isn’t so eager to extend voting
rights to its nation's youth. Meanwhile, here in Canada, it’s not even legal to
help a 98-year-old cancer patient kill himself. Actually, I can see
someone like Stephen Harper offering euthanasia to only people
under 18 in this country. This way, the Conservative government
could kill off a sizable chunk of the threatening youth population
before they’re old enough to vote!
Closer
to home, the snivelling oppressive scumbags in the Dunderdale
government have outlawed tanning beds for anyone under 19. Now, let
me make one thing nice and clear: I would rather eat ten
packs of extra-tar cigarettes per day than to be caught dead in a
solarium. However, to each his own, and I find it more than a little
hypocritical that the government will allow people as young as 16 to
risk life and limb behind a wheel on the nation’s highways, yet
they won’t allow people under 19 to get a suntan because eccentric
idiots like Darryl Yetman of the Canadian Cancer Society doesn’t
like it. Mr. Yetman and his kind are part of the problem, as opposed
to part of the solution. It seems they’re quite adept at
interfering with every aspect of society. They appear to have their
hands and noses into everything—everything, that is, except
actually discovering a cure for cancer. Open your eyes, people: young
citizens of the province can even join the military at 17 and run the
risk of leaving an arm in someone’s rice patty in the Far East—yet
they cannot legally undergo an artificial suntan in their home
province until they turn 19! Incredible. At least Vic
Lawlor,the owner of seven tanning salons in the province, is speaking
out against the hypocrisy and oppression—even if it sounds a
bit financially self-serving coming from someone in his position.
Such hypocrisy
surrounding the discrepancies in legal ages is something I recently
brought up on Facebook, after being “invited” to a discussion
featuring Newfoundland and Labrador Liberal Party treasurer Jeff
Marshall, who
has
drafted a resolution to make it Liberal party policy to lower the
voting age to 16. I pointed out
in a post on the event’s official Facebook page that “if
we’re not mature enough to vote when we’re as old as 17, then why
[is the criminal justice system] charging us with crimes six years
before we’re old enough to legally vote for the moronic creeps who
write the legislation we’re contravening? It’s basic oppression,
and I’m quite militant about it.”
I went on to state in a followup comment that “we
won’t see any real changes along the lines of oppressive legal
ages, I fear, until the windows start smashing, the rubber bullets
start zinging, and the blood and brains start spilling onto the
asphalt.” As
a result, Kate White, some bureaucratic ninny from the MUN Liberals,
responded with the following comment:
“The
MUN Liberals do not condone violence against politicians or the
Canadian government as a means to political change. If you do not
refrain from using violent language and threatening officials you
will be removed from the page.”
Ha!
Does she actually think I’m concerned about being dismissed from
such a pathetic group whose existence is merely symbolic? The
naivete simply astounds me! (On December 3rd, Ms White posted a link
with the following admonishment on her Facebook wall: “Dear
all make-up loving friends: go on this site now. You will die of
happiness.” Now, if that doesn’t sound like the thoughts of a
woman with devout sociopolitical convictions!)
As long as groups like the MUN Liberals are obedient little
line-toeing boys and girls, the oppressive system will perpetuate.
If Kate White is so concerned about the plight of disenfranchised
adolescents, she should learn how to operate a firearm—or at least
throw a rock.
Youth political
oppression aside, it looks like we’re going to have to settle for
throwing snowballs, not rocks, for a considerable time yet. I’m
going to be cozying up tonight in a rug with a cup of warm tea and a
copy of Escape from Childhood—a
book that someone like Candace Simms or Kate White could do well by
reading. Now where did I put that Bauhaus CD....
"An older friend of mine puts it best when she says, “Sometime during their first semester of university they discover trendy terms like ‘homophobic’ and ‘racially insensitive’, and from that time onward they do nothing but wreak havoc on campus by behaving like silly brainwashed children..."
ReplyDeleteI work with some "silly brainwashed children". Last semester I cut the sleeves off of our Residence Life staff t-shirts. On one of the sleeves is the LGBQT logo, and for such actions I, a heterosexual, was rumored to be "homophobic". They did not understand nor care to ask me why I had done so. I wanted to challenge Residence Life on their passive stance in dealing with sexuality, and how their silence was still keeping non-homosexuals discriminated against the rest of society by keeping it, "hush-hush" on a t-shirt but never openly addressing the issue. After our all-day (10am to 4pm) "training" session last semester, I felt as though the message from two of our openly gay and bisexual Residence Life Advisers was that of teen angst, "you don't know my life, you don't know what it's like to be me!" While hardships are real for any and everyone, I do not think that in order for non-heterosexuals to be accepted we have to resort to old Christian tactics of guilt to, "see the light". Non-heterosexuals using Christian tactics, a religion that has long-held to declare homosexuality a sin, seems ironic. There must be better ways of achieving this than having everyone reduced to tears.
*non-heterosexuals discriminated against the rest of society
Delete'Pickiness' (if that's a word) has become a way of life in western culture. No matter how genuinely noble the intentions of the early advocates of 'universality' and 'political correctness', the ideologies they espoused have spawned a mutated monster. Such ideologies have become merely yet another opportunity for 'baiting' people and spoiling for a fight. Also, as 'traditional' forms of bigotry (based on race and religion) become simply too dated and objectionable, such ideologies provide fodder for new forms of intolerance. For example--as I discuss in another of my blog posts--anti-smoking policies and legislation have more to do with "putting people in their place" than what they do any genuine concern for public health and safety. Simply put, political 'correctness' can be a wonderful means of preserving the class wars of old. It's basic psychology.
Delete