Society has for a long time favored opacity over candor, probably to my detriment. I'm expressive and like to share my opinions, for better and sometimes for worse.
Sometimes when people don't agree with you, instead of debating, they look for angles where they can hurt you. They are also less likely to give the benefit of the doubt. I remember an old supervisor that was a conservative Christian. One day a book of hers went missing. I knew she thought I stole it, because the accusation was in her stare and in her entire body language. But in truth I never did steal anything of hers. I was not even aware of that book. It was just another case where prejudice let her to assume that, because I was not a married heterosexual, I must therefore be a thief as well, among other vices. Only as the years went by did she gradually come to accept that I had few vices. I do have a weakness for candy, as she discovered. I think she turned around and accepted that I was a moral being. But one never knows. That is only a hunch.
The media raked gays over the coals for criticizing Mozilla's choice of CEO, due to his donation to a cause that fights against marriage rights for gays. This was viewed as "hindering freedom of speech" and "undemocratic" and even "not liberal." Sources from the New York Times to the Los Angeles Times defended the guy who doesn't want me to be married.
I don't know why. I guess because they think my marriage isn't important. They would care if their marriages were involved, I'm sure.
The media is playing a different tune today regarding an owner of an NBA team whose ex-girlfriend is shopping around a recording she made of a private phone call. Some girlfriend. I think this illustrates the danger of older people pursuing younger lovers. It's a bad idea, about ninety-nine times out of a hundred. There may be exceptions, but not that many, I think.
In his private conversation, he expressed racist views. And yes, racism is bad.
I think that the difference in the media's reaction between this case and the one involving gays is very telling. On the one hand, a guy wants to interfere in the private lives of gays, and donates $1,000 to that end, as a matter of public record. On the other hand, a guy expresses his racism to his girlfriend in what he thought was a private conversation, and he should be forced to sell his team because of that. This is crazy.
I probably wouldn't want to know Sterling's opinions on gays. I would imagine they are just as negative as his opinions on blacks. The manner in which his views became public seems underhanded. If everyone's thoughts became known, I think no one could ever get along, because offensive thoughts occur to everyone at some time or another.
People need to be very careful what they say over the telephone nowadays. I bet the only reason Sterling was ensnared is because he's a clueless old man who hasn't updated his knowledge of technology, let alone his understanding of culture. He's still living in the 1950's. My preference would be to let him be unless he really does something, like donate money to a racist organization or say something on the record.
I have known racist old folks in my day. They are not going to learn a lesson or improve or change. I don't think there is value to be gained in digging them out of the woodwork and trying to punish them or make an example out of them. They may even win sympathy based upon poor health and poor mental status. Sterling was stupid but ultimately, his private chat only harmed his own interests, not those of anyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment