Defending Bigots

Screen Shot 2013-11-26 at 10.42.50 am

In my recent discussions of Barilla’s very bad social behaviour, I was taken aback when one of my “friends” decided they needed to come out and speak up on behalf of the company. I am reasonably certain that a big corporation such as theirs has plenty of resources to combat little ole me all on their own. Indeed they seemed plenty willing and able to enter the fight of their own volition and spout off all sorts of stupidity.

However one must question the motives of such a defence:The TMBG song above, though technically about a racist friend, suits quite adequately, for any time any ones friends speak up in defence of a bigotry.

While Christopher Hitchens only said:

Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity.

I think his intention was not that one join in, but rather that one take a decisive stance against. But of course Kathy was well within her rights to take her own path and determine the company she wished to be associated with. She was not however given liberty to insinuate or put words into my mouth.

Not once (up to this post) have I called Barilla homophobes (it is too inelegant a parsing in this instance even for me). Although a cursory glance at the word meaning is more than enough to determine that it is an appropriate descriptor, based on their actions.

Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs.
Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behaviour such as discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientations that are non-heterosexual.

Kathy then goes on to make weak tea noises about what they believe (without any support). Who gives a flying fuck what a pastas company believes about same sex marriage? It is none of their business. On a broader note if you don’t like same sex marriage don’t get married to someone of the same gender, nothing more need be applied. I have yet (in perhaps a decade of strong debate and study of this issue) heard any objection to the voluntary life mating of two adults that was not religiously derived. So lets not pretend there is a difference to be split.

As with all human rights issues to have come up in the past several centuries (women’s rights, darker skinned peoples rights, the right of different skin colours to intermarry, etc) this too is just a shrugging off of the chains of dim minded religious dictators who would subjugate humans to their own corrupt and dastardly wills.

Kathy thinks she understands my concern, but I doubt she does. I will in coming posts take the time to further explain why this injustice is both personal and destructive to human flourishing on the whole, as well, even in this time of enlightenment, far too common, and still lurking under a thin veneer of modern manners (like it seems to be with Kathy). But with “friends” like these, who needs enemas?

Cowardice or Pragmatism?

Often, in business or other impersonal settings, conversation edges on personal matters. I have always been somewhat aloof, and so it has always been my habit to deflect the personal approach with short and sweet, comments that while true enough are never the complete truth, and often allow the other parties to fill in the blanks with their own preconceptions. For example; when people ask if I am married I only say yes. When they assume I have a wife, in many instances I do nothing to correct the error. If they ask is my wife Chinese I just say yes, and not: “no, but my husband is.”

Continue reading

Filthy Evil Hateful (but free) Expression

I became aware of some awfulness via Facebook, that hits right at the heart of my recent free expression/holocaust debate. The source of pain are 100 tweets from parents claiming they would murder their child if the found out it was gay.  It is certainly personally offensive, and if these do not fit into the definition that people try to market as hate-speech nothing does. I am reasonably certain some of them are pranks or bravado, but some of them – if only one, must be assumed to be legitimate. Continue reading