***For the remainder of this article, I will replace the negative generalizations with <>. This is not to minimize the topic, but rather to prevent any one group from being singled out or any specific event occurring either now or in the past.***
We hear in the news about this <> person being killed by this <> cop, or this <> man was attacked on the street by <> kids. I think that the news people like to stir trouble. When they are reporting on these stories, the tragedy is missed and overshadowed by the <> of the victims. I realize that there are major cultural differences in the different regions of the US. The <>isms are not exclusive to one <> or another. All <> are guilty of discrimination. Despite recent advances in balancing rights, there still exists an undertone of anxiety with regard to <>.
Kids today are being taught differently than when I was young. Today, a <> kid is just a kid. We might finally be approaching a generation that identifies people not based on <>, but based on accomplishments or merit. That is not to say that <>ism is gone, but at least it is shrinking and perhaps by the next generation...Y...or is it Z...anyway, they will likely not classify people by <>, but by how they are treated and teach by example.
I mentioned earlier about news stories keeping things stirred up...I did not mention the positives--athletes, actors, musicians, and other television personalities coming out to embrace our differences. People are realizing that none of <> matters. What matters is what is in the heart and how we treat each other. Some day...<> won't matter...and all we will be is people.
1 comment:
It's sad that our media thrives or even drives on human chromatic. And what's even more distressful is that most often it's done to create and ignite acts of hatred or violence. I think it's an abuse of the 1ST amendment; freedom of speech, in the highest order. And what's horrific is that our society on the whole becomes vicious, at least, at the suggestion of doing it any other way.
Post a Comment