The Trouble with Isms (was 'male-identification')

[Ebony]

No: HPFGUIDX 3600

I've had to be quiet for the past few days... there's been a lot in 
my mailbox from this group that I have strong opinions about.  By no 
means do I want my replies to get me banned from the list... let me 
tread softly here...

Also, before I begin, please know that I am not attacking one poster 
in general.  The old saying "if the shoe fits" is in effect.  If what 
I say offends, please know that these are just my thoughts in general 
sifted from reading over 300 posts.  And the implications for Harry 
Potter and his creator are at the end of this long post.

I'll begin this by saying that I feel somewhat alienated from most 
baby boomer ideologies.  I believe that all groups deserve equal 
opportunity, that women should get an equal day's pay for an equal 
day's work, that persons should be entitled to partner benefits no 
matter what their sexual preference, and that most wars are quite 
senseless.

However, the problem that I have with most movements that had their 
origin in the 1960s is that the movements seem to be stuck there.  By 
not reinventing themselves for postmodern times, these "isms" have 
alienated an entire generation and a half.  Black leaders get angry 
at younger African Americans for not continuing the struggle.  
Feminists get angry at young women for not being militant enough (a 
la Ally McBeal).  The list goes on and on.

The anger and disappointment is somewhat justifiable.  We Xers and 
Yers should have more passion for ideologies.  Just not the 
ideologies of the past.

What I think has happened is that the world we live in today is 
somewhat different from the world in 1960.  Does my generation seem 
materialistic?  We should be!  For us, economics is a HUGE issue--
after all, we have the *pleasant* task of paying for the boomers' 
retirement while taking care of our own children.  We also know that 
Social Security will be gone long before we hit retirement at age 90 
or whatever ridiculous age we'll have to be before we can qualify for 
benefits.

Another thing that most of us are unconsciously doing is re-
evaluating the movements of the 1960s and 1970s.  Most young African 
Americans could care less about reparations.  We do support 
affirmative action only until American education becomes 
desegregated... how can you be expected to compete when equal access 
is a fantasy?  (To that end, my choice of undergraduate institution 
was based upon the raging and often nasty affirmative action debate 
that went on in the mid-1990s... I went to a college where no one 
could dare say to me that I didn't earn the right to be there.)  And 
as far as race relations are concerned, the consensus among youth and 
young adults in my community is "integration didn't work... Next!  
What's Plan B?"  No one's looking for militant solutions nowadays.  
Just common sense. 

The backlash against feminism has occurred because we had to deal 
with the breakdown of the family.  Personal testimonials 
notwithstanding, the fact is that a lot of us had to raise ourselves 
(with help from peers and the media).  If you want statistical 
evidence of what I'm saying, I'd be happy to provide it.  I'm in the 
kid business, and those teachers who parents love to blame for their 
children's ills are doing research on *why children aren't 
learning*.  The findings will shock you.

PACIFISM 

--- Martha wrote:
> (And I must say there is such a big difference between murder and 
> what our men and women in combat do!!!  Just my personal opinion).

All I'll say is a hearty "amen".  I too can learn temperance.  :-)

As the daughter of a Vietnam vet, and the sweetheart of a man in 
uniform, the idea that war is a necessary evil as long as we humans 
have hierarchical tendencies is branded into my psyche.  

I was a pacifist as a teen until my father sat me down and explained 
to me exactly how he felt coming home from Asia as a shell-shocked 
nineteen year old and getting spat upon, jeered at, etc.  Yes, the 
war was stupid (as most wars are) and our men shouldn't have been 
over there.  But the people who should have gotten unclean bodily 
fluids tossed upon them were in Washington.

If the real world and Harry's world were like heaven, I'd say sure, 
let's follow that passage in Isaiah, convert our weapons into farming 
implements, and make love and not war.

But neither world is so benign.  Scale down the armed forces?  You'd 
better believe that the 21st century's answer to Hitler will come 
knocking at out door.

You may not mind World War III being fought in Britain or the United 
States.  But *I* do. 

> Martha wrote:

> A strong woman type whose profession is being a wife and mother and 
> loving every minute of it and wouldn't give a hoot if all the 
> characters in the book were men and who thinks women sure do over 
> react about many things and.......isn't this about Harry Potter?

I find it interesting that while it's okay to chastise JKR for not 
having more female characters in the limelight, members were shot 
down at the Yahoo site for:  1) saying that Harry Potter should be 
more ethnically diverse (the comment was that the ethnic characters 
were similarly marginalized), and 2) identifying the House-Elves with 
enslaved African Americans.  I haven't seen those members around here 
lately.

I think the story is just fine the way that it is.  If I wanted to 
read a novel with lots of diversity, there are many choices 
available.  If I wanted to read a novel with lots of strong female 
characters, again, there are many choices available.

The heart of the matter is that is bothers me when people are not 
consistent in their ideological reasoning.  I am not a conservative 
by any means.  But I do know one thing.  You may have rights.  But 
your rights stop when mine begin.  And my rights stop where yours 
begin.

What this all boils down to is that everyone has a responsibility to 
respect their fellow man and acknowledge his or his human rights.  
However, the trouble with many -isms in Y2K is that those who wear 
these labels want not only respect, want not only acceptance, but 
*endorsement*.  Some even seem to want to punish those in the 
dominant group who oppressed them.  Most wish to suppress any 
ideology that does not agree with their own.  How unfair!  You've 
become a virtual mirror of your oppressor.

I have no desire to punish white Anglo-Saxon Protestant men.  The 
fact that I am neither white nor Anglo-Saxon nor Protestant nor male 
does not give me the right to sit in judgment of them.  (The fact 
that I believe that every unjust act is avenged by Someone eventually 
helps a great deal with this.)  Nor does my so-called "double 
minority" status give me the right to force my personal ideologies on 
any other human being, or condemn them for not embracing them as 
their own.

I do hope Joanne Rowling continues to write the story that is in her 
heart, free from any political pressure.  She does not have a 
responsibility to carry the banner for anyone's agenda besides her 
own.  We as readers may wish to claim ownership of her work, but 
*she* is the creator and ultimately should maintain sovereignty over 
her characters' destiny.

Long live Harry Potter--the Boy Who Lived (and sparked controversy)!

Ebony