Posted on 05/03/2003 7:29:56 AM PDT by TLBSHOW
Let's just ban everything
California school officials have issued new textbook regulations that are designed to keep "offensive" material from hurting anyone's feelings.
And how do you keep from offending people?
Invoke censorship.
Fox News reported this week that a variety of phrases, images and historic references have been suppressed in order to afford a more politically-correct environment for students. After examining the things that have been banned, it becomes evident to any clear-thinking individual that these school officials are more concerned with rewriting history and manipulating the minds of children than they are with actually teaching.
Here are just a few of the directives California educators have mandated for their textbooks:
The nation's "Founding Fathers" must be referred to as "the Framers," to avoid any implication that they were what they were – men. You know, these great men typically wore powdered wigs and wore frilly clothes, so maybe we should refer to them as our "Founding Cross Dressers," or the "Founding Transgenders." (Then again, maybe I shouldn't make such suggestions because, as ludicrous as it sounds, some California educator might think it's not such a bad idea.)
Images of unsafe foods – hot dogs, sodas, cake, etc. – have been banned. Maybe we should appease the unyielding animal-rights activists and not depict any meat dishes, at all. Better yet, maybe we should suggest in our textbooks that meat eaters – probably 90 percent of Americans – are the equivalent of murderers.
Mount Rushmore can no longer be pictured because "it appears to offend" some Indians – I mean Native Americans. I say tear Mount Rushmore down if it is so offensive. Just blow it up. This nation of "inclusion" should not boast a monument that does not include a minority, a homosexual, a dolphin or a handicapped individual.
Even yachts cannot be depicted in California textbooks because they are seen as elitist. Well, aren't houses seen as elitist to homeless people? Maybe photos of cars should also be banned. In fact, shouldn't all photos be banned since many people can't afford a nice camera? And don't books come from trees? Should we even have books in our schools when they come at the expense of the trees?
You get the picture.
Our nation is comprised of a growing number of people who have made an art form of being offended, and California educators are determined to mollify them.
This is, of course, an unending proposition. The list of offenses will continue to grow and censorship-minded California officials will eventually find their textbooks full of empty white pages – unless white pages are also found to be offensive.
"I think our textbooks should to our greatest capacity be free of any type of stereotyping," Sue Stickel, who is "deputy superintendent for curriculum and instruction" for the California Department of Education, told Fox News. (Ms. Stickel, I'd bet that 90 percent of California students can't even spell or define the word "stereotyping.")
This spirit of suppression is not exclusive to California education officials. We see it all across the nation. People are offended by the Ten Commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance, prayers at high-school football games, pro-adoption license plates, etc. And as soon as these people complain, some left-leaning judge or city official can typically be found to authorize a ruling to squelch the offending activity or image. (By the way, how is it that conservatives are typically portrayed as book burners when it is the left that is so comfortable with silencing those with whom they disagree?)
Unless we are prepared to ban everything in our nation – because virtually everything can be made to appear offensive – we had better start electing political leaders and school officials who understand that education is supposed to be about the free exchange of ideas and actual teaching. We'd better get serious about putting people in power who will not acquiesce to those who are habitually insulted or offended by even the most innocuous things.
And now that I've finished this column, I think I'll head over to McDonalds in my SUV
There are people (like me) who do not have an internet connection and have to put up with the constant bombardment of other peoples stray electrical waves. Then to type replies, I have to blink my eyelids realy realy quick. Or click the heals of my shoes together. And do you know how painful that gets?
So Knock It Off!!!!!!!!!
BTW: Great article.
Not only an art form, but a living from that art form.
My first real job out of college was at a company where one of the stressed company values was not to offend anyone. We were warned to be careful when talking or joking not to say anything that might offend our coworkers or customers. The concept sounded good.
At my next job, the newly hired ex-lawyer president and VP of HR put in place an employee manual. It said, among other things, that employees were not allowed to express any religious views in any way while at work. It was deemed inappropriate. When I challenged whether someone could wear a cross necklace or quietly bow their head in prayer in the lunch room or whether that was prohibited, I was told that absolutely those things were premissible, they just didn't want someone "slaughtering a goat twice a day". (Yes, they actually said that.)
So, here we are today where a teacher or aide can be given a year's suspension for wearing a cross necklace. It's madness.
It might help the French . . .
Oh, wait.
Education is not the goal of the Education Industry.
I wonder if there's a way to bring an anti-trust lawsuit over government schools? They do have an unfair advantage, stifle competition, place unreasonable restrictions on "trade", and generally destroy advancement...
Regards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.