.JPG)
Saturday, March 03, 2012
Thursday, March 01, 2012
Pettily Childish
In my mind that is what PC stands for. And while I hoped we were getting past this stage of uncalled for hypersensitivity, I find this indicator we are not.
The mascot "Fighting Sioux" is hostile to American Indians. Seriously? How about a broader view? Pettily Childish is hostile to the entire notion of free speech. Seriously.
I hardly know where to begin. Should I start with the notion that the NCAA's business is athletics, not constitutional law? No? Let's step beyond that then to the NCAA's composition of post-secondary education institutions where, once upon a time, enlightened discussion on such fundamental matters as 1st amendment rights was in vigorous exercise.
The right to free speech was of such import to our founding citizens that ratification of the constitution was contingent upon the inclusion of the Bill of Rights, in which free speech holds the premier position. Why have a 1st Amendment if an unelected NCAA executive VP can simply decide that something is hostile and the athletes' prowess in competition is irrelevant in, well, an athletic competition?
Hostile? Hostility, as is beauty, talent, and worth, is decidedly in the eye of the beholder. Let's grant for the sake of argument that the logos and monikers may be objectionable to some. Is this grounds for skilled athletes, whose seemingly principal fault is to attend a given university, to forfeit games in lieu of kissing the rings of the Pettily Childish?
Might it be that the NCAA's unilateral action insisting on forfeit is regarded as hostile by the athletes of the University of North Dakota? Ya think?
As an American I find it hostile that Jeremiah Wright rails about America being "founded on racism", that he declares we "do terrorism to others" and he invites God to damn America. But as an American I comprehend the fact he is allowed to say it, protected by the first amendment.
As an American I find it hostile that the Westboroo Baptist idiots rudely and insensitively insert themselves into the most poignant moments of the lives of our fallen servicemembers' families. But the hostility I perceive is nothing more than something I have to live with, get over, or seek remedy to through the justice system. It is not something some Pettily Childish body is going to, or should, fix for me. Homage, my friends, to the first amendment.
Might NY taxpayers of a certain conscience find that New York libraries regard the right to surf hard core porn sites on library computers to be "hostile"? Highly likely. Is that right exercised? Yes, and theoretically protected by the first amendment.
I don't follow college basketball until the number of teams in March Madness has been reduced to a single digit. I have no idea what teams are viable this year. But if there is a chance that Notre Dame gets a tournament bid is the NCAA going to determine on my behalf that The Fighting Irish nickname is hostile to those, such as myself, of proud Irish heritage?
I doubt it, for Pettily Childish seems not to extend to white Europeans.
Nor should it. Pettily Childish is an infringement of imagined ownership over common sense and free expression. In all of history no language has ever become more precise by reducing its vocabulary. Yet the Pettily Childish seek to "enhance" our culture by eliminating elements of it. And this is a game of endless escalation. Since Pettily Childish is a function of one's heritage and sympathies there can be no single satisfying rule of application; each offended group asserts its ownership in different ways and to differing extents. The game is rigged for tit-for-tat reprisal and resultant up-the-ante antics from the next perceived slight.
So we will all just let it pass by unnoted that the Fighting Irish logo is a an amazing assemblage of stereotypes: a wee, ill-humored, shamrock-wearing, green-clad, bare knuckled white guy sporting a thin jawline beard and looking for a fight. Is this logo representative of me? Not especially. But I think I am in a healthier frame of mind by being amused at my heritage and proud for being selected. (No one ever named their basketball team the Fighting Swiss. Should the Swiss be offended?)
The NCAA should stick to athletics, and get out of the business of threatening talented athletes on behalf of the Pettily Childish.
For the record....
Timothy Patrick
University of North Dakota teams risk forfeiting any post-season games if their athletes, cheerleaders or band wear or display the school's Fighting Sioux nickname and American Indian head logo, an NCAA official said Wednesday.
...the university "must forfeit competition" if "it has not adhered to this requirement" in any post-season games that UND teams have been invited to play in.
The NCAA has long said the nickname and logo are hostile to American Indians...mention of forfeiting games is a new development.
The mascot "Fighting Sioux" is hostile to American Indians. Seriously? How about a broader view? Pettily Childish is hostile to the entire notion of free speech. Seriously.
I hardly know where to begin. Should I start with the notion that the NCAA's business is athletics, not constitutional law? No? Let's step beyond that then to the NCAA's composition of post-secondary education institutions where, once upon a time, enlightened discussion on such fundamental matters as 1st amendment rights was in vigorous exercise.
The right to free speech was of such import to our founding citizens that ratification of the constitution was contingent upon the inclusion of the Bill of Rights, in which free speech holds the premier position. Why have a 1st Amendment if an unelected NCAA executive VP can simply decide that something is hostile and the athletes' prowess in competition is irrelevant in, well, an athletic competition?
Hostile? Hostility, as is beauty, talent, and worth, is decidedly in the eye of the beholder. Let's grant for the sake of argument that the logos and monikers may be objectionable to some. Is this grounds for skilled athletes, whose seemingly principal fault is to attend a given university, to forfeit games in lieu of kissing the rings of the Pettily Childish?
Might it be that the NCAA's unilateral action insisting on forfeit is regarded as hostile by the athletes of the University of North Dakota? Ya think?
As an American I find it hostile that Jeremiah Wright rails about America being "founded on racism", that he declares we "do terrorism to others" and he invites God to damn America. But as an American I comprehend the fact he is allowed to say it, protected by the first amendment.
As an American I find it hostile that the Westboroo Baptist idiots rudely and insensitively insert themselves into the most poignant moments of the lives of our fallen servicemembers' families. But the hostility I perceive is nothing more than something I have to live with, get over, or seek remedy to through the justice system. It is not something some Pettily Childish body is going to, or should, fix for me. Homage, my friends, to the first amendment.
Might NY taxpayers of a certain conscience find that New York libraries regard the right to surf hard core porn sites on library computers to be "hostile"? Highly likely. Is that right exercised? Yes, and theoretically protected by the first amendment.
I don't follow college basketball until the number of teams in March Madness has been reduced to a single digit. I have no idea what teams are viable this year. But if there is a chance that Notre Dame gets a tournament bid is the NCAA going to determine on my behalf that The Fighting Irish nickname is hostile to those, such as myself, of proud Irish heritage?
I doubt it, for Pettily Childish seems not to extend to white Europeans.
Nor should it. Pettily Childish is an infringement of imagined ownership over common sense and free expression. In all of history no language has ever become more precise by reducing its vocabulary. Yet the Pettily Childish seek to "enhance" our culture by eliminating elements of it. And this is a game of endless escalation. Since Pettily Childish is a function of one's heritage and sympathies there can be no single satisfying rule of application; each offended group asserts its ownership in different ways and to differing extents. The game is rigged for tit-for-tat reprisal and resultant up-the-ante antics from the next perceived slight.
So we will all just let it pass by unnoted that the Fighting Irish logo is a an amazing assemblage of stereotypes: a wee, ill-humored, shamrock-wearing, green-clad, bare knuckled white guy sporting a thin jawline beard and looking for a fight. Is this logo representative of me? Not especially. But I think I am in a healthier frame of mind by being amused at my heritage and proud for being selected. (No one ever named their basketball team the Fighting Swiss. Should the Swiss be offended?)
The NCAA should stick to athletics, and get out of the business of threatening talented athletes on behalf of the Pettily Childish.
For the record....
Timothy Patrick
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
