Earlier this month, the youngsters of
[Wayland's] Claypit Hill School arrived home one afternoon clutching an interesting note from the principal. It seems that Halloween had been deemed a politically incorrect holiday, which meant that the school's biggest Halloween celebration, the annual kindergarten costume parade, could no longer be.
"We have decided to end the practice of dressing in costume and parading around the building," according to the memo.
"Although we all agree it is a lot of fun for many children, we do have children that don't celebrate Halloween and feel uncomfortable or stay home from school that day," the principal continued. "We want to be an inclusive community and meet the needs of every child."
The Boston Globe
Friday, October 23, 2003
Senseless correctness
By Brian McGrory
I fully appreciate the importance of a free and open op-ed page in our papers, but when I saw Barbara Anderson's recent comments I was very surprised that you printed something so obviously showing her insensitivity to others, or her ignorance, or both
("Talk show hosts' offense was merely in the minds of some listeners," Viewpoint, Friday, Oct. 17).
I think this article puts her in such a bad light that you may have wanted to talk her out of submitting it. If she declined, then I feel that you did do a service to the public by showing everyone her true side....
Maybe Barbara Anderson should ask Miss Manners for some help in this area. Her comments in the article show that she could use some advice regarding racial sensitivity.
The Salem News
Friday, October 24, 2003
Columnist didn't help herself with defense of Dennis and Callahan
Letter to the editor by Perry Justesen of Beverly
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
The following was subsequently
published in the Salem News
on Thursday, November 6, 2003, titled:
"In a P.C. world even the calendar risks offending someone"
The inmates are finally running the asylum.
"Political correctness" has replaced common sense, even
civility. Few dare stand up to it.
Anything that offends anyone is now fair game for vicious attack,
often followed by demands for "reparations" (read
extortion).
Bullying works: Just look at the groveling of even the
unintentional transgressors all around us these days.
"One nation under God"? Delete God.
"Givers and takers"? Outright divisive!
"In God We Trust"? Who's we?
Efforts by the politically correct to marginalize Christmas are bad
enough, but now comes Halloween. According to a recent news report,
the principal of a Wayland kindergarten has banned its annual
Halloween costume parade because, she said, "We do have children
that don't celebrate Halloween and feel uncomfortable."
Are Halloween's roots Christian or Pagan? Is it viewed as a
religious or secular event? And how can a tots' costume parade possibly
offend someone?
Since we're going PC full tilt, let's attack the really important
stuff:
Let's change the calendar! After all, every day of the week is
named after a (gasp!) god. Our Anglo-Saxon calendar of course was
imposed on us by a bunch of very old, long-dead and very white
northern-European men. It assaults our delicate sensitivities day in
and day out and has oppressed us a lot longer than the Pledge of
Allegiance or even the Declaration of Independence - almost as long as
the Bible.
The genesis of the names for our days of the week was in ancient
Greece and Rome, whose customs became especially widespread after the
Roman Empire conquered most of Europe. Forced to adopt the seven-day
week, Anglo-Saxon barbarians protested by replacing the names of Roman
gods with their own.
Sunday was named for the sun, a heathen bow to the Sun god; Monday
for the moon. Tuesday was named for the Anglo-Saxon god of war, Tiw -
so Tiwesdaeg. Wednesday was named for the chief Norse god, Woden -
thus Wodensdaeg; and Thursday for Icelandic thundergod Thor - Thursdaeg. Friday honored chief Norse goddess and wife of Woden, Frige
- which gave us Frigedaeg; and Saturday was called Saeterdaeg in
recognition of Saeter or Saturn, the Roman god of time.
To separate church from calendar we should adopt the official
Western Astrology Planetary Colors model, in which each day of the
week has been assigned simply a color. Halloween, falling this year on
Friday, would become White, Oct. 31, 2003.
But we've still got a seriously un-PC problem.
January was named for the Roman god Janus; February for Februa,
their festival of purification; and March for their god Mars. April
honors Aphrodite, a Greek goddess. May recognizes Maia, Rome's goddess
of spring; while June is goddess Juno's month. (Ancient Greeks, Romans
and Anglo-Saxons obviously were politically correct when it came to
equal treatment of powerful gods and goddesses.)
July and August were named for Roman emperors Julius and Augustus
Caesar. (Even back then politicians had to name things after
themselves.)
September (Latin for month number seven), October (eight), November
(nine) and December (10) were simply Roman placeholders, originally in
proper sequence until emperors grabbed the summer months for
themselves. The bumped-up generic names were likely reserved for
future use so the Roman tribunes wouldn't have to build another darned
viaduct or coliseum just to give some politician a place to plant his
moniker. We should name a month - instead of a tunnel - for
"Tip" O'Neill.
We'll rename our months, starting with January - Univember,
Bivember, Trivember, Quadober, Quintober, Hexember, September,
October, November (in proper order), our 10th month Tip O'Neill, etc.
Combined with the Western Astrology Planetary Colors model, Halloween
becomes White, Tip O'Neill 31, 2003.
But we're still left with the most egregious PC violation
of all - the year!
2003 A.D. - Anno Domini - Latin for "In the year of Our
Lord." Yikes, how crass and offensive to somebody! The simplest
solution to this glaring bit of political incorrectness is to just
start our calendar over entirely.
Instead of B.C. representing "Before Christ," we'll just
change it to mean "Before Clinton." Halloween would then
become White, Tip O'Neill 31, 11 A.D. for "After Diversity."
Problem solved and perfectly politically correct!
Nobody can call us "insensitive" then.
Oh-oh, is that a thunderstorm brewing? Thor, honest to God - oops
- I'm only joking, I apologize!
|
|
|
Chip
Ford |
The Boston Globe
Friday, October 23, 2003
Senseless correctness
By Brian McGrory, Globe Columnist
Every once in a while I drop my guard and make the mistake of thinking that the world, or at least our little portion of it, is a reasonably sane place.
I'll read a newspaper story like the one earlier this week that said parents in Andover were bucking town officials who wanted to move Halloween up a day to ease traffic. And I'll say to myself, common sense prevails. Normalcy overrules. Everything's going to be just fine in this corner of America that we call home.
But of course, I'd be wrong, because in the end, common sense seldom prevails. Normalcy rarely overrules, and things are too often anything but fine.
I refer, of course, to the goings on in Wayland. Nice town. Big houses. Last names that sound like mail-order garden supply companies. Home of the best chain of golf shops ever known.
Earlier this month, the youngsters of the town's Claypit Hill School arrived home one afternoon clutching an interesting note from the principal. It seems that Halloween had been deemed a politically incorrect holiday, which meant that the school's biggest Halloween celebration, the annual kindergarten costume parade, could no longer be.
"We have decided to end the practice of dressing in costume and parading around the building," according to the memo.
"Although we all agree it is a lot of fun for many children, we do have children that don't celebrate Halloween and feel uncomfortable or stay home from school that day," the principal continued. "We want to be an inclusive community and meet the needs of every child."
Parents are quietly fuming, quietly because they're afraid of angering school officials. Most of the adults didn't realize people "celebrated" Halloween. They thought kids simply put on costumes and got a kick out of parading the halls and patrolling the streets for all the free candy they could possibly find.
They thought Halloween, like so many other holidays, brought people together. But now they've come to learn that, in some eyes, it sets people apart.
They understand the Christian roots of Halloween, the All Hallow's Eve and all that. But these days, the secular nature of the holiday overwhelms the religious history. If we're kneeling at an altar, it's to Mars and Hershey; for a bunch of kids looking for some free Snickers and Starbursts, what could be wrong with that?
In Wayland, apparently a lot. I have no doubt that the principal, Cynthia Dunham, runs a wonderful elementary school. But in the name of virtue, even the best-intentioned people can do harm, and the harm here is to common sense.
Questions needed to be asked of Dunham. For instance, how could she possibly celebrate Labor Day, knowing that many of her students are the sons and daughters of upper-level management? Can these poor kids possibly feel good about that?
And what about Groundhog Day? Is there not a PETA member in town angry over the fact that poor Punxsutawney Phil is rudely awakened from his winter slumber for our ceremonial benefit?
Does Arbor Day discriminate against apartment dwellers without yards? Does Memorial Day disrespect the living? Does Patriot's Day violate the sense of young internationalists?
I'm sure Dunham cares, but she didn't return the call to say.
If she had, I would have lauded her attempt at inclusion, but questioned her method. Why not teach children who don't partake in Halloween why some kids do, and teach those who do why others don't, and then let them do what they choose?
Why not share in each other's cultures rather than prevent kids from celebrating them? Isn't that really what inclusion is about, to welcome in, not to winnow out? Isn't it better for Christian kids to learn about Hanukkah, and Jewish kids to learn about Christmas, rather than pretend that neither exists?
Or have we really gone so far over the edge that in a good school in an upstanding town even trick or treat is beyond the pale?
Brian McGrory is a Globe columnist.
Return to
top
The Salem News
Friday, October 24, 2003
Columnist didn't help herself with defense of Dennis and Callahan
To the Editor:
I fully appreciate the importance of a free and open op-ed page in our papers, but when I saw Barbara Anderson's recent comments I was very surprised that you printed something so obviously showing her insensitivity to others, or her ignorance, or both
("Talk show hosts' offense was merely in the minds of some listeners," Viewpoint, Friday, Oct. 17).
I think this article puts her in such a bad light that you may have wanted to talk her out of submitting it. If she declined, then I feel that you did do a service to the public by showing everyone her true side.
I do not normally respond directly to these types of comments and I must state that I do not normally agree with her viewpoints, but I am responding in this case as you have given her a forum to comment that goes beyond her normal area of "expertise."
I benefit financially from her efforts to reduce our taxes, but my children suffer from the consequences of the resulting lack of funds. It is the balance required and understanding of the ramifications of your actions that are critical for all of us, and this applies especially to someone in her position. She is a good balance for our Legislature, but this article treads outside those boundaries.
You should ask yourselves whether if someone else had written this article you would have published it. Did you give as much space to the apologies from the WEEI talk show personalities or comments from the Metco parents?
Anderson managed to mixed many issues and concerns in a twisted fashion. She combines her own viewpoints, experiences and perspectives with generalities which reinforce the reason the Metco parents were incensed in the first place.
Is this an editorial on society in general? Is this her view - that people's own personal beliefs are wrong if they do not align with her own or those of the general public? The title implies this so strongly that when I read it I already knew what direction the article would be taking. The minds of some listeners (and your readers and all of us) are what defines us and makes us who we are in this society. Her reverse logic puts those who would point out their concerns on the defensive.
If people are driven to speak out, this should cause you to review your comments and/or actions. This should cause one to be more sensitive in the future and apologize as appropriate for the unintended offense.
Maybe Barbara Anderson should ask Miss Manners for some help in this area. Her comments in the article show that she could use some advice regarding racial sensitivity. It seems as if the one making the connection between an exercising black child and "monkey flips" was Barbara Anderson.
If you look at the nonracial incident where Don Zimmer rushed Pedro Martinez who subsequently tossed him to the ground, all that was necessary to diffuse the incident was for Pedro to apologize. Don Zimmer's emotional apology was appropriate, but anyone watching realized that no matter what the circumstance, tossing an elderly man to the ground was something to be avoided at all costs.
Pedro's lack of response says to others that he is not of this opinion. Conversely, in the WEEI case, a lack of a response from Metco parents condones this type of comment, whether inadvertent, deep-seated or a way to get a quick laugh or reaction from the show's listeners.
Anderson's column presents her in such a negative way that I guess I should thank you for showing this side of her to your readers. She has done much with this article to marginalize herself in the same manner Rush Limbaugh and Lt. Gen. William Boykin have done in recent days.
Perry Justesen
Beverly
Return to
top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml