Posted by Craig
I found this article today that I almost couldn’t believe. The article discusses the effects from a speech that Jada Pinkett Smith gave at last Saturday at The Harvard Foundation for Intercultural and Race Relations 20th annual Cultural Rhythms show. The uproar started when the new addition of the Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Supporters Alliance (BGLTSA), attended the gala. Smith was the recipient of the foundation’s “Artist of the Year” award, and also served as host. Comments that she made at this event were apparently not appreciated by the BGLTSA.
The BGLTSA Co-Chair Jordan B. Woods accused Smith of using language that was “extremely heteronormative, and made BGLTSA members feel uncomfortable.” For those of you unfamiliar with the term as I was, he explains that this type of speech implies that the standard sexual relationship is strictly between men and women. They are not accusing her of being homo-phobic, but merely narrow-minded in her scope of relationships outside of male-female bounds.
This seems quite ironic that they would accuse someone of being narrow-minded in their scope of relationships when just recently her husband, Will Smith, just alluded to the fact that they have an “open” marriage. One of the attendees at the ceremony stated that he felt Pinkett-Smith was simply giving examples of her own life during her speech, that she did not intend it to be words in which to live by.
To me, this is simply another example of the bombardment of the Gay and Lesbian society to make everyone into them. They have taken to verbal abuse to try to chastise those that do not think the same way as them. My view, standard relationship is a between a man and woman. Yes, relationships do exist contrary to that belief, and quite frankly I don’t care what people do behind closed doors. But minds cannot be altered simply because people choose to take lifestyle not socially acceptable. This attack on Smith when she did not intentionally try to harm any group is showing the urgency that the Gay and Lesbian community feels in changing societies values. MTV is already a stumping ground for their values, as is most of Hollywood, and after this attack I see why Hollywood has succumbed to the pressure.
If the democrats are given the opportunity to block the President’s judicial nominees, our whole society will be completely different in just 5 years. It has been pointed out again that the judges sitting now are not thinking along the same lines as the rest of the county when they struck down the death penalty for youth. My prediction for the next five years if Bush is not able to appoint his nominees; Gays and Lesbians will be able to marry in every state, there will be no capital punishment, terrorists will be allowed to make their political statements however they wish including loss of innocent life, marijuana will be made legal, McDonald’s will crumble due to legal fees against PETA and groups claiming the food made them fat, prescription drugs can be ordered out of country causing American companies to shut down, and if you are caught mentioning the word GOD, Jesus, Allah, or any other religious symbol, you will be arrested.
Perhaps the previous paragraph was a bit of a Chicken Little- Sky is Falling type analogy, but the point is our society is spiraling out of control with seemingly no one caring to stop it. It starts with demanding an apology about a speech not directed at anyone, and ends with anarchist society.
March 02, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If I may say a word or two I think first off, you are making more of this then there is.
ReplyDelete1. The speaker was not punished, nor told she cannot return unless she is mindful of those of a different sexual nature out there.
2. The gay spokesperson's language was fairly moderate. Its spokesperson did not call the artist a bigot or suggest she was grossly insensitive. No call was made to denounce her views. If an apology was requested (I don't recall if there was after reading the article) it was for oversight, not for inviting one who spoke about heterosexual relationships.
Some might have felt uncomfortable but that is understandable for a group of people whose very sexual nature alienates them from the rest of society. That is a fact. What is expected in return is another question and in so far as anything was demanded I refer back to point 2.
It is yet unknown whether they are seeking consideration a few guest speakers who can address their relationship concerns (a fair request in my view) or seeking a veto on all who do not share their concerns (not reasonable).
3. Most gay people are not out to "convert" straights. Indeed, most believe, with some very good reasons, that their sexual orientation is not chosen. They seek a better, more hospitable environment towards them so they, and the younger ones that follow them could live the normal, relatively fearless life heterosexuals have provided for themselves.
I would think that when most gays become aware of their sexual nature (pre-teens to mid-20s for most), they recognize their social isolation.
The typical gay person questions if not fears, how his or her parents and close friends will react to the news and their is no social activity that helps this person move towards a relevant romantic relationship. Heterosexuals have school dances, the junior and senior prom nights, and weddings. The gay person can not partake in these without subjecting him or herself to ridicule or shame.
Gays are told that students should not be exposed to sexuality when in fact they are themselves bombarded by sex education classes geared towards heterosexuals, abstinence-until-marriage programs, the gossip about the love interests of their classmates, and the disparaging comments about the known "faggot."
4. Most gays remember the time they struggled with their sexual identity and the social isolation they felt because their social lives were neglected. It is not unreasonable for people in this position to seek a remedy to alleviate their suffering.
5. So far I have only defended their motives. I will not go in-depth into what they are or are not owed except to say that (1) each request they seek must be evaluated separately and (2) that I am more inclined to support those measures designed to accommodate but oppose those which use the state's authority to oppose those with a different moral viewpoint. Gay clubs meeting after schools is in, mandatory tolerance-building assemblies are out.
I could go down the line but this is long enough and if I were to meander anymore there won't be time to work on my own blog.
As usual, your blog is an interesting read.
Hmm..The Heretic's comments were also interesting.
ReplyDeleteCraig, while I was reading your Chicken Little comment, it reminded me of one of my favorite ranting posts of all time, in case you haven't read it yet: http://coldfury.com/index.php?p=5071