"And prompt me, that my tongue may utter forth"

A few random prompt questions from the soon to close Plinky Prompts website. These come from last summer's prompts. I think responders are meant to write a few paragraphs, but for me, here, and any who wish to add their two penniworth in comments, just a few words or sentences will suffice.
(Quotation in title is from Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus: V, iii)


Can anything be funny, or are some things off limits?

There are some things which ought to be off limits for joke-making. Yes - I know all about the benefits, and there are many, of Free Speech. I realise that what some consider to be off limits remains material and an easy target for some comedians - that doesn't make it funny! Joking about a person with any kind of disability, for instance is unkind and obnoxious. I particularly dislike the use of the word "spazz" or spastic, which sadly is heard in that recent offering from Weird Al Yankowich, ironically titled "Word Crimes", and has put me off him completely. I found the whole thing unfunny, smug and faintly elitist.

Another prompt along the same lines:
Is political correctness a useful concept, or does it stifle honest discussion?

You might as well say "does courtesy stifle honest discussion?" At its root, political correctness is old fashioned good manners, courtesy, empathy, sensitivity to the feelings of others.


And something completely different:

Have you ever had a random encounter or fleeting moment with a stranger that stuck with you?

The wording of this prompt was a bit odd! One responder had spotted that, changed the "that" to "who".

The prompt reminded me of that lovely old film "Brief Encounter", story of a random meeting of a man and woman at a railway station, and how they fell in love against their better judgment.

Life is filled with random encounters, or fleeting moments with strangers, that or who either stick with you or disappear into the wide blue yonder within minutes. I've had many experiences of each type over the years, too many for this post, most of them pleasant enough, some even memorable. The one unpleasant random encounter with a stranger I remember well, happened when I was in my early twenties, as I walked from a bus stop to the hotel where I was working. The hotel was a re-purposed old (17th century) mansion, some 200 yards from the main road across fields, but accessible by a narrow roadway. It was around 9.30 pm in wintertime, dark. I became aware of someone walking just to my right and a little behind me. As he passed me he invited me to please "touch him" in a place he was demonstrating in the, ahem, flesh. In other words, he begged me to feel his exhibited penis. I was a little shocked, but even more annoyed, replied, "Don't be so bloody silly!!" Increasing my speed to a near-jog, I turned to approach the hotel from across the field, a much shorter distance than taking the longer roadway. The fellow was probably quite harmless - but you never can tell.

And different again:


It’s the year 2113. A major museum is running an exhibition on life and culture as it was in 2013. You’re asked to write an introduction for the show’s brochure. What will it say?

What will it say? From my vantage point in 2014, I don't know - it'll be in Chinese.

More Sensitivities : The Confederate Flag ~ Country Music

After last week's flurry of complaints and sensitivities over the Native American War Bonnet used in a fashion show by Victoria's Secret, another episode in the sensitivity wars has appeared, this one over images of the Confederate Flag.
A country singer, Trace Adkins, sported an ear piece decorated with a representation of the Confederate Flag when he took part in the nationally televised lighting ceremony of the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree. He apparently hit a raw nerve for some viewers. I can't find any close-up of the offending earpiece, or evidence that these are for sale (perhaps Adkins' earpiece was custom-made). Countless other items of jewellery and apparel decorated with the Confederate Flag are easily available - type the correct words into Google Image Search to see a selection.

As for Trace Adkins, I've written about him and his natal chart once before: here's a link to my 2008 post: Trace Adkins - Capricorn/Aquarius Mash-up.

The singer has responded to current complaints, via his own website :

As a proud American I object to oppression of any kind.
To me, the battle flag represents remembrance of my Southern lineage — I am a descendant of Confederate soldiers who followed that flag into battle.
I advocate for the preservation of America’s battlefields and honest conversation about our Country’s history.
To those who view the flag as a symbol of racism, that was not my message and I did not intend offense.

I think the large majority of members are people who don’t want history to forget the brave and gallant men who fought for the Confederacy,” he writes. “They’re our ancestors. Yet we as Americans have tried to erase them from our history books.

Adkins, in his 2007 autobiography A Personal Stand: Observations and Opinions from a Freethinking Roughneck wrote that he is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, and states that his interest has always been historical, as opposed to some desire for the south to rise again.

From a string of comments under the relevant HuffPo article I note that to many the Confederate Flag is a representation of racism, the days of slavery and segregation. The South fought, and lost, a civil war in an attempt to preserve the right to own other humans. Among the overwhelming majority of objections to its use in a broadcast performance, even as decoration on an earpiece, the most common comment involved comparing it with a Nazi swastika. Both symbols have shameful histories, when seen in context of wars in which they were involved; but the swastika did have better symbolism centuries before Germany became involved in its use. That fact in no way diminishes the 20th century horror to which the symbol will forever remain connected. As to the flag: from infoplease

The Confederate battle flag, called the "Southern Cross" or the cross of St. Andrew, has been described variously as a proud emblem of Southern heritage and as a shameful reminder of slavery and segregation. In the past, several Southern states flew the Confederate battle flag along with the U.S. and state flags over their statehouses. Others incorporated the controversial symbol into the design of their state flags. The Confederate battle flag has also been appropriated by the Ku Klux Klan and other racist hate groups. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, more than 500 extremist groups use the Southern Cross as one of their symbols.

Flags. Strange things, flags, through the centuries, revered objects, symbols of patriotism. Flags, from their beginnings, have always had association with battle, the military, war, empire. As such, for me they fall into a category along with the Native American War Bonnet: not something to be celebrated. The Union Jack, or Union flag as I believe it's now called, carries echoes of many wrongs in its past, as well as a few good things. Likewise the Stars and Stripes, and most other national flags. All in all it'd be a very good thing if the use of national flags as symbols on clothing and other adornments were avoided completely, I'd best not say "outlawed" - first amendment stuff would be against that, I guess. Still, use of national flags would be far better limited to serious and historic ceremonial occasions....if used even then.

As for country music, my own love affair with the genre lasted for more than ten years and was, oddly enough, conducted from the UK, and in ignorance of certain nuances and connections I've since come to understand. I do still love some of the old artists and songs, those of Merle, Waylon, Willie, Kris. My interest in the genre ended soon after the time of Garth Brooks; a gaggle of new male country artists who came hard on his heels: Kenny Chesney,Toby Keith, Brad Paisley, Keith Urban, Tim McGraw, Tracy Lawrence and Trace Adkins among them, are little more than vaguely familiar names to me. We attended one country concert here in town, several years ago when Oklahoma-born Joe Diffie, performed. The only thing I recall from that is a song he sang praising and thanking "the troops". He ordered the audience to stand. I was the sole body in that theater to remained seated; "the troops" in question were not fighting in World War II, and those are the only troops for whom I personally feel gratitude.

AGEISM

Yesterday's thoughts on PCism reminded me of a complaint of my own, and if I say so myself, it's a valid one, one which matches the original intentions of political correctness: reaching for general courtesy and thoughtfulness for others.

It's a tricky question to ask in the current economic climate, but why is so much emphasis placed on numbers? Numbers are at the top and bottom of most of our common problems, economy-wise, climate-wise, vote-wise and otherwise, but when it comes to numbers of years a person spends on Earth, numbers ought to be accorded less importance.

Among the young and those heading towards middle-age, there appears to be a feeling that sentient life somehow declines and eventually stops soon after the 50th year.

Stereotyping or labelling of any group, generation or individual on the basis of age is illogical. An example of this came up during the recent election circus. A piece by Niall Ferguson at The Daily Beast was basically a tear-down piece of Joe Biden's VP debate performance. Last para:

What we saw last week was not just a contrast between Irish-American political styles. We saw the opening round in the clash of generations that will soon dominate American politics. If Laughing Uncle Joe—who turns 70 this year—has nothing better to offer than “It’s going to be OK,” then I suspect a surprisingly large number of younger voters will turn instead to young Father—and future veep—Paul Ryan.

Apart from the right-wing slant of the whole piece, this pitting of one generation against another bugs me.

Some seem to assume that the accumulation of knowledge, experience and emotional intelligence the average person gathers through time simply degenerates into so much goo, with the hapless individual rapidly descending into vegetative state, just waiting for the journey to the funeral home. Where did this idea come from? I think it comes from the past and should be rapidly updated. People, of whatever age, who cling to this notion are old themselves - in their mindset.

Ageism is one more big "ism" needing to be addressed. In the USA and UK there is legislation in place to combat racism and sexism; the USA also has legislation dealing with age discrimination in employment - I don't know how well that works. I accept that there are many considerations an employer has to weigh, especially in cases where lengthy and expensive training is part of the job, when choosing between a younger person and a person who is nearing retirement. That kind of thing isn't what annoys me. I worked in the department administering Employment Tribunals in the UK for 24 years, and became sharply aware that issues are hardly ever clear-cut in such cases.

What really concerns me is the more social aspect of ageism. People of "a certain age" are expected to accept insults and sneers while ethnic minorities and younger women have some protection of the law against discrimination, slurs and name-calling.

"Ageism is as odious as racism and sexism" - that's a quote from someone called Claude Pepper, but I've said it myself, often. Description of older individuals as geezers, wrinklies, crotchety, blue-hairs, senile, etc. is abuse, as hurtful and degrading as someone being called "nigger", "rag-head" and other such slurs. Many people just don't understand this - or don't wish to understand, or care. This same carelessness and ignorance is, sadly, why legislation became necessary to stem the tide of racism and sexism. Insulting the elderly happens without thought by some, often the same people who are sensitive to racism and sexism.



Chart above is from a website Ageism Hurts.

In the section Seeing Ageism:

Once a person begins to understand the depths to which ageism insidiously infiltrates American (and UK - my addition) society, it is easy to recognize it operating at every level of daily life. The idea that old people are supposed to be frail, incompetent, less than, and laughable permeates culture so thoroughly that it takes real attention to catch the small messages as they slip by..........

A further aspect of ageism is generationism, something I've noticed often, and have blogged about before. The so-called "Boomer" generation often comes under attack by younger writers of Generation X and others. Boomers are blamed for leaving later generations the dreadful mess they will soon inherit. They omit to mention the benefits they've grown up with, due in part to the efforts, courage and expertise of those older generations.

Looking through the non-PCness of Victoria's Secret - to something worse...

I stumbled upon the latest conflict in political correctness yesterday. Anybody who knows me well (not many people these days - they're mostly gone to the big wotnot in the sky) knows that I staunchly defended PC when it first appeared on the scene, many decades ago. Since then, because in certain circles it has been taken too far - farther than it was ever meant to be taken, "PC" has become, along with "socialist", a dirty word to some people.

This current conflict has arisen via a fashion parade by lingerie chain Victoria's Secret, and it's not for the first time something similar has occurred. The bone of contention this time is a Native American/American Indian War Bonnet worn, along with several items of turquoise jewellery of Native symbolism - and a leopard-skin patterned tiny bikini of no relevant symbolism at all. Native Americans have seen this display as being offensive and disrespectful of their culture. A similar thing happened on a previous occasion when Japanese Geisha garb was used, and fell under a similar barrage of accusations - of being offensive to Eastern culture.

I can't possibly feel as those of Native American bloodlines feel on this latest issue. I do, however, respect their hurt feelings and sensitivity. Vic's Secret say they took advice from cultural associations before going ahead with that particular costume in their fashion parade, and were given the go ahead. So there was no blatant disrespect intended - the matter was afforded some careful forethought. I understand they have now apologised and removed the image from any videos.

Lay aside the cultural aspect of this for a moment, the fact that the War Bonnet is a sacred symbol (see Wikipedia for information). Now...see Victoria's Secret's use of the costume as an affectionate, if clumsy, celebration of the beauty in Native American culture. Ask why would a war bonnet of whatever culture be celebrated?

War. War. War.

Killing. Of. Other. Humans. We are supposed to be trying to evolve, damn it! In which case celebrating something - anything - with any connection to killing, is not helpful or wise. War and battles are not to be celebrated, no matter how revered the symbols to any cultural set of humanity, ancient or modern, indigenous or invaders. I'm sorry if that point of view is offensive to Native Americans, but it is how I feel.....that is where this incident hits my own point of extreme sensitivity.