 |
A
group of New York Times journalists released a list of racial terms
they find “bothersome” Sunday.
NYT’s
Race/Related team included terms like”ethnic,” person of color” and
“illegal immigrant” among those they found slightly offensive.
John Eligon, the paper’s national correspondent, found “ethnic”a
troublesome term because it “normalizes” whiteness.
"Be
that as it may, we now live in the world of thought crimes. And that
apparently includes word crimes as well. Of course, they’re not
technically crimes… yet. But give us a few years of Elizabeth Warren in
the White House (or the “Ethnic House” I suppose) and that condition
may be changing. Just don’t bring up the Native American thing to her
because that’s really, really offensive. " [ Full
Hot Air]
In the year 2081(?)
amendments to the Constitution dictate that all
Americans are fully equal and not allowed to be smarter,
better-looking, or more physically able than anyone else. The
Handicapper General's agents enforce the equality laws, forcing
citizens to wear "handicaps": masks for those who are too beautiful,
radios inside the ears of intelligent people, and heavy weights for the
strong or athletic.
And
to offset his good looks, the H-G men required that he wear at all
times a red rubber ball for a nose, keep his eyebrows shaved off, and
cover his even white teeth with black caps at snaggle-tooth random. "If
you see this boy, " said the ballerina, "do not - I repeat, do not -
try to reason with him." -
HARRISON BERGERON by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
|
|
 |
|
I've posted/shared Harrison Bergeron many times.
ReplyDeleteThe site is looking and working great. Congrats.
Hey, whiteness is ethnic too. Heck, it comes in more flavors than Baskin-Robbins, from Icelandic to Russian to Armenian to Georgian, even Greek and Italain and Czech, with each little European tribe in between having its own flavor, language, culture, and history that goes back >1000 years. It's high time all whites stood up and let the world know that we're all completely different, yet still the same. And superior. WTH, that kind of logic works for feminists, right?
ReplyDelete