You Don't Need to Give or Receive So Much Attention, Gang

"I'm too old, too tired and too talented for any of that shit." — Brian Cox

After some reactionary handwringing about The 1619 Project, I did that thing we aren't supposed to do. I bought it and read it. You know what? It's good. Really good. Sure, there are some unsubstantiated conclusions about people the authors couldn't possibly know and assumptions of intent that are kind of out of left field but, on the whole, this is an excellent addition to a review of the history of the most progressive nation currently on the planet. I consider myself pretty well educated and this anthology has some serious points to make and makes them well.

While there are a few out there in the Neo-Marxist category hellbent on destroying the country due to its faulty beginnings, I can't find anyone (who isn't a strident zealot) calling for Nikole Hannah-Jones parallel history replacing a more optimistic and patriotic perspective on the country's founding. A side by side teaching of both the Founding Fathers narrative in tandem with a history of our biggest flaw nationally strikes me as a better, more well-rounded pedagogical approach. In general, causing any children to feel anguish, discomfort, and a sense of inferiority seems in direct contrast to educating them.

Yesterday, I caught a tweet that the CBS show Survivor (one of my favorite programs in history) stating that for Season 41, 'people with vaginas' were provided an extra pair of underwear during shooting. The outcry for this phrase was a little astounding. Did my eyes roll inside my head? Of course. Did it cause some sort of These Genderfluid Idiots Are Invading My Favorite Show kneejerk annoyance? No. The point of communication is to communicate ideas and thoughts. 'People with vaginas' pretty much communicates a clear picture: women and transgender women who have had transition surgery. 'People with vaginas' takes fewer words, so it is preferable. Why the outrage?

President Biden the whole of the Democrat machine are declaring that our very democracy is at stake because they can't get the Voter Rights Bill passed. Really? Democracy falls because the federal government cannot require no contest mail-in voting, broader identification requirements to vote, and campaign finance changes? This seems a bit extreme, doesn't it? I read the Voting Rights bills and I've read the restrictions on voting coming out of the red states they are designed to combat and nothing reads like Jim Crow 2.0. The hysteria surrounding this is about optics and rhetoric.

Likewise, Florida is considering a law that prevents teachers from making students feel discomfort for their racial background and the squawk on the other side is that this is designed to protect white kids from feeling guilty about the actions of other bigoted white people from years ago? Why would anyone want kids to feel guilty about their skin color? Wouldn't teaching all students that discrimination based on race or sex is bad and leave it at that?

At University of Illinois at Chicago Law School students are horrified at the use of racial slurs (written in the accepted manner 'n-word' and 'b-word') in an exam question about a woman being discriminated against because of her race. These are law students. Do they think the real world circumstances once they graduate and get work in the legal world will somehow be free of the use of the actual words? Are they nuts or just performing for attention (and recall, in today's marketplace where OnlyFans creators can make serious cash, attention online can equal a substantial payout)?

The fringe elements of America are living in their own version of The Jerry Springer Show sans host or time limit. Remember those shows? Dave knew before the taping that his overweight girlfriend got pregnant by his father but waited until the cameras were rolling before he leapt out of his chair to attack him onstage. It was a performance to be seen by millions and Dave didn't disappoint.

Marjorie Taylor Green is a performer. AOC is dancing for the cameras. Every blown out, grandiose statement of outrage these days is simply preening for attention like the crying of a baby who immediately stops when dad throws a piece of American cheese on its face.

The M&M characters are being reformed to represent a more inclusive grouping. Cool. Inclusion comes from pop culture more than it does legislation any way. Pop culture is about performing for the crowd. The real question is who does this hurt in any possible fashion? If you're all up in arms about this, don't eat fucking M&Ms. You realize this is just candy, right?

For crissakes, take a knee OK? Breathe for a moment. Think before you speak (or tweet). See the performative rhetoric for what it is, read between the lines, get a grain or two of salt, and stop being a freaked out kid screaming that he isn't getting the attention his younger brother is getting.