The Kickback

I think keeping this journal of sorts has made me think more on a casual basis. I always work best when I have someone to impress, and a semi-anonymous readership of infinite potential is an ideal source of motivation. On the other hand, it's pretty irritating because I keep thinking of things when I'm out and forgetting about them by the time I sit down to write. I'm going to push through as many things from the past day or so as I can remember.

I just read in The Advocate that yet another high school, this one in Georgia, has decided to ban all non-academic clubs for the purpose of banning a gay-straight alliance. This is the sort of stuff I both love to hate and hate to love. I love to hate it for obvious reasons: I see banning a gay-straight alliance as so unequivocally wrong. I don't have to constantly entertain another side in my mind while I'm thinking about this issue. It's so clear: they're being motherfuckers. I suppose the only other side, one of my favorite controversies, is the question: should someone always do what they believe is right, even if you believe that what they believe is right is absolutely wrong? It's such a great question...right on the border of ill-formed. That might be my favorite question to ask myself in times of intellectual boredom. Should you always do what you believe is right? Well, of course you should! Act on what you believe is right! But what if that comes into conflict with what other people think is right? The Inquisition might be a good example. Putting aside the likely case that the Inquisition's motivation was to wield power, not to save souls, if they really did think they were saving souls when they forced people to confess as they were tortured and killed, given that they had this belief, were they doing wrong? I mean, surely we'd all hurt somebody in the short term to save that person in the long term, right? We might tie a loved one who was an addict to a bed so they could go through withdrawal. We might break up an abusive relationship even if it seriously emotionally hurts the person in the short run. So why wouldn't we force the person we loved to obey rigid standards that defied their impulses and desires if we were sure it would get their soul into the kingdom of heaven? I don't think we can really set standards by saying "you can do whatever you want as long as it doesn't violate another person's rights" because rights are somewhat subjective. I mean, I think I know exactly what rights people have. I'd love to set those rights as standards for everyone else. But I have to acknowledge that my reasoning isn't universal and I have no reason to believe a priori that I am better qualified than anyone else to make these decisions.

So where was I? Right, why I hate to love these people who cancel all extracurriculars just to stop a gay-straight alliance. Well, at least they're making themselves clear. I find something very refreshing about the Fred Phelpses of the world. The people who are willing to say "God hates fags and so do I!" We know where he stands. We know he's homophobic. I find much more disturbing people who say they're not homophobic but then add in "It's not about that. It's about protecting marriage. And the children." Stop playing politician, kids. You're trying to protect marriage and children from homosexuals. That means you think that homosexuals are something you need to be protected from. You may say you think children do best with two parents of different sexes, but can you really think that the damage caused by not having this sort of parenting situation can possibly be worse than any of many legal things? Alcoholic parents? Single parents? Mentally ill parents? Cold parents? Parents who smother you? Parents who push you too hard? Parents who unwittingly look at you in the wrong way when you're three and thereby screw you up for life? I imagine there are many, many ways in which children can be hurt by even well-meaning, well-equipped parents that far outweigh the problems caused by missing a parent of one of the two sexes. Let's face it. We're all messed up to a degree, and that degree is much higher than the messed uppedness having same sex parents could possibly cause.

But getting back to people who piss me off. Almost worse than the politicians are the people who act like they're doing the world a favor by not being racist/sexist/homophobic/classist. It's hard for me to put my finger on, but I see people who constantly carry the attitude of "Acknowledge my goodness! I am not like those other white/male/straight/wealthy people who choose to look down on you. I have chosen to put myself at your level. Am I not good?" This feeling that you had a choice in the matter, that you could have been awful but instead chose not to, is absolutely appalling to me. This notion carries the tacit notion that you do have some sort of superiority. If you truly believe in something, here, equality, you should not feel at all self-congratulatory for acting on it. If you have that feeling, you don't believe in equality with your whole being. Now, I should be clear that all traits that really piss me off in other people I experience in myself. I occasionally catch myself feeling self-congratulatory, and it's one of several things that bring me a constant feeling of guilt.

Wow, I had so much more to say, but it's time to watch SVU. I'll write more tonight. On important things. Like New Orleans, the 850-or-so deaths in Iraq today, and the rape charges brought against a fellow Rumpus staffer.