Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/000134.php on line 106

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/000134.php on line 106
May 30, 2003
No!

Must. Not. Blog. No. Matter. What. The. Temptation.

No matter what human rights atrocities are being supported by our government.

No matter what cover-ups are under way.

No matter what's happening to the national media as they join the feeding frenzy for internet ratings.

No matter what lies we're being fed.

No matter if the lunatics are in charge of the asylum, as most of us have been saying for two years.

No matter if there's a holocaust and we're too busy redefining date rape to care.

No matter how badly I want to tell everyone to go read this and keep it in mind the next time you're trying to make a persuasive argument to change someone's mind.

It's hard to keep my mouth shut. Doesn't come naturally to me.

I read an essay from someone who wonders, if terrorists, dictators, and the lies our government tells us "don't matter," then what does matter these days? and I'd really like to comment on it.

I read an article confirming my suspicion (after "debating" with the "masculinist" who thought the entire history of Western Civilization was a litany of women's systematic oppression of men, as I've mentioned before) that the "masculinist" movement is in actuality a repressive, regressive social movement, and it's hard not to start shouting. (Both in protest of the "masculinists" who are, in fact, wanting women back in the kitchen and in support of those admirable men who are fighting for equal rights in areas like parenting.)

And then I wonder if it's a coincidence that the distasteful OpinionJournal now has an OpEd piece up equating contemporary civil rights efforts, but most especially feminism with frivolity, based upon the press-fueled hysteria over Annika Sorenstam playing in a traditionally male golf tournament.

What historic "wrong" was being "remedied" by allowing Annika Sorenstam (71-74) to compete against Justin Leonard, who shot a final round 61?
Typically of the OpinionJournal, they completely ignore the fact that it wasn't against the rules for Sorenstam to play in the tournament. She didn't show up with a battery of equal-rights lawyers to help her demand "equal access". This wasn't about feminism unless you were a sports writer desperate for a headline.

It was about golf. Sorenstam is a superb golfer who, when she failed to make the cut, was still doing better than a number of the men in the tournament. I notice that the article, careful to cite the winning golfer's score, fails to mention or scoff at the score of the second-place, third-place, or tenth-place finishers. That's because they were men and, in the OpinionJournal's eyes, "entitled" to be there, so their losing scores weren't an issue.

And that is the real issue here. Not that a player didn't make the final cut. That one of the many players who didn't make the final cut was female.

Beyond that, the OpinionJournal's piece is, more broadly about how "rights" is now a game and largely fails to serve any real purpose of promoting equality in a meaningful way.

The rights game now is about just winning, by manipulating legislatures or finding a whatever-you-want judge, as in Moorestown, and then declaring that the issue is "settled law."

But it isn't settled, not unless the broad public recognizes and accepts the result, as it did for women's rights. If the public does not, if it has moved on from compassion fatigue to rights fatigue, then those sentiments will start to show up in voting booths in the new civil war between the reds and the blues.

Warning! Cognitive dissonance!

The mind boggles at how easily Daniel Henninger can, in one paragraph, contemptuously dismiss a woman as a failure and an interloper for competing in a traditionally male golf tournament, and in another paragraph, talk glibly of how "women's rights" to equality are now accepted.

I'm off topic, aren't I? The problem is, I have opinions on these things and it's hard to keep my mouth shut. (Not that I did, but now I am again.)

Anyhow.

When I read that our much-touted "coalition" isn't willing to step in and help bear the burden of rebuilding Iraq after our "coalition" invasion, I find it hard not to speak bitterly of how you can't trust a crook or a politician to stay bought any more. (Maybe I should be giving the Bushleaguer more points? He, at least, is staying true to his corporate owners.) The truth is, though, that the "coalition" didn't contain many countries with any sizeable numbers of troops to send, which is why we're now hoping the U.N. will step in and save our bacon.

And then I start reading how another totalitarian, torturing government has been oppressing and killing its citizens at the behest of USofA corporations (google it, there are a lot of links), and it's almost impossible to keep quiet.

I've been advised by one person kind enough to drop me a comment that my problem is that I don't focus on one issue, the way the more-disciplined bloggers do. And I agree that my scattershot approach probably fueled my current burnout.

I could choose one subject, one issue, and focus on that.

Let me see...shall I care about civil war in the Congo and the horrific refugee crisis that the Western world seems to be unwilling to resolve?

Should I concentrate on pointing out the large and growing threat that AIDS is in third-world countries?

Should I obsess about the drought and famine in Ethiopia, and discuss how the West has, for years, failed to alleviate the problems of this region?

Should I worry incessantly about the nuclear threats providing by North Korea, Iran, India, and Pakistan?

Should I focus on civil rights, the plight of the underprivileged, the criminal duplicity of this Administration, the movement to roll back the gains of feminism, the crimes of corporations, ecological disasters, the insipid cowardice of the DLC, the threat of WWIII being instigated by a country with a grudge against a neighbor, or what?

Someone tell me the one, significant issue in this bunch and I'll undertake not to get hot under the collar and wander off-topic discussing the test of them.

Sigh.

On the other hand, it must be said that I've gotten through an amazing amount of work this week. Contracts signed, pricing negotiated, sales and marketing material written and approved, clients installed and running smoothly, etc.

So, by-and-large, the hiatus remains in effect for another week (with, no doubt, occasional lapses), by which time I may have this zoo under some control and be ready to turn my attention back to pointing out the Bushleaguer's many and varied inadequacies.

Posted by AnneZook at 11:10 AM


Comments