Bill and Billy Special Report: Tolerance

Hi. I'm Bill.

And I'm Billy. We're broth-

We've got this deal, see, where we get to do one of Davonian's blog posts every once in a while.

Yeah, like every week. It's...

Quiet, you. I'm older, so I get to do the talking. Plus, I'm the one that did the research for this week's topic.

Um, Bill, about your research...

Thank me later, Billy. Anyway, folks, have you seen these bumper stickers around? Ones like this:
Yeah, Bill, I'm telling you, you're research is...

Have you wondered what their talking about? I'm supposed to believe in tolerance. I think that's what it says, at least. But I surely can't tolerate everything, can I Billy?

I usually can't tolerate you...

That's the spirit. It's mutual. And here's the thing, there must be some other hidden message. I figure--they're telling us which things we're specifically supposed to tolerate. It's not just some funny font, but each letter means something!

Did you just speak in my voice?

No, that was emphasis, you nitwit. Anyway, can I give my presentation now, uninterrupted?

Okay, be my guest...

Right. So I researched what each symbol means. In the spirit of tolerance, may it be known that we are not to impede the following practices or beliefs:


1) Capital Punishment Via Crucifixion. The "T" in tolerance is a cross, and my sources tell me that such an object--two planks of wood nailed or tied together to make this unique shape--was often used for hanging criminals. Whatever your views are on capital punishment, you have to admit that it's OK as long as the state mandates this method be used.

Bill, I...

Shhhh. I did the research after all, now, onto the next one:


2) Nuclear Disarmament. Ha. This one was easy. It was originally used by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. It's a semaphoric representation of the initials "N" and "D." No matter our views on WMDs, we are urged to be tolerant of those who wish them dismantled.

[Sigh]

No objection? Moving on, then:


3) Ritual Scalping. This crude weapon is best used for removing an enemy's scalp. It often is necessary for its user to go into a berserker rage in order to achieve the raw, animal power to perform such an inhuman act. But, as it is, the powers that be are asking us to permit this practice.

Oh, that's it. Listen, you've got it all wrong, big brother!

Oh, really? Listen, I was about to move on to the "E", which clearly shows a male sign positioned over a female sign, demonstrating our need to tolerate the traditional cowboy po-

No, no, no!

You are not going to sit there and tell me that we are also to be intolerant of dreadlocked flautists? The prominent urban gang known as the Crips? Archways with round windows? The waning crescent phase of the moon's natural cycle, for God's sake? I mean, how are we suppose to stop that one? And what about Mr. Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Isn't that what this whole bloody things, about, relativity? Hmmm?

Just because you were born eight minutes before I was does not mean you're smarter. Listen--I don't think you showed what those symbols are supposed to represent in each case, and I don't think you've taken the message of the whole thing quite right. Furthermore, you're going to get us fired. Our boss is a proud liberal and he probably has one of the those Tolerance bumper stickers himself!

I checked with him; he doesn't. He said the message behind it was so obvious and common-sensical that he hoped society didn't need to be told. But I told him we'd show him just how scholarly-like the whole thing can be.

Oh goodness. This will never do. [Clocks Bill with the blunt end of the "L" in "Tolerance." Bill's down for the count]. Alright, until next time, folks (if there is one)...

Public Service Announcements (Lighter)

Dear Everyone,

For the betterment of our mutual "getting-on," I am obliged to make the following Public Service Announcements:

001: In the absence of working traffic lights, the law states that everyone should proceed as if it were a four-way stop. This means alternating turns. It's really quite safe and efficient this way. If you aren't afraid of car accidents, you should listen to "Last Kiss" as performed by Pearl Jam-- or possibly whichever band originally wrote it.

002: It is, without any doubt, pronounced new-clee-ar. Even if you're a Republican, there's no excuse. And shame on you people for actively training that poor Palin lady to say it incorrectly just for the sake of "folk-appeal." She's still in a downward spiral.

003: It is not obligatory to transform every "fun" element from our collective pop culture into a feature film. Sometimes, this is downright inadvisable. If you are going to base a movie on an animated television series which was in turn based on an action figure, you might be headed down the wrong track.

004: It is universally recognized that CAPITAL LETTERS IMPLY A RAISED VOICE (i.e. YELLING). Some people are squeamish, and this might startle them. My apologies for any "accidents" I've inadvertently caused.

005: The government recommends that the following be on hand in case of an emergency: three gallons of water per person in the household, an AM/FM radio with extra batteries, and at least one flashlight (with batteries) per person. The government has not yet approved its recommended household survival plan in case of a zombie invasion. Congress, are you reading this?

006: The following test will help you determine if your iPod's volume is up too high: 1) Listen to the iPod at the volume you (probably in error) find appropriate; 2) Pull the "earbuds" from your ears and hold them about three inches away; 3) Ascertain whether you can still hear the music; 4) If you can, reduce the volume and begin a step 1; 5) Repeat until it clear that you, and you alone can hear the music.

007: If you didn't like Quantum of Solace nearly as much as Casino Royale, I suggest approaching with a different set of expectations. This is what I call "The Zen Approach to James Bond." See, usually, we amp up our heart rate and overall nervous system for action movies. Instead, try dimming the lights and lighting some scented candles. Relax as much as possible before viewing. Do guided meditation or deep breathing (in through your nose, out silently through your mouth), if you're into that sort of thing. Contemplate some traditional koanic expressions ("If a tree falls...") for a little while. When you find that everything slows down and crystalizes around you, you're probably ready. Watching this movie in such a trance-like state might show it to be quite profound--it may even provide you with your own quantum of solace.

008: Mr. Lewis will readily argue against the following misguided statements:
-"Those who can't do...." Sorry, can't actually bring myself to finish this one.
-"A pun is the lowest form of humor." Just bad puns, actually.
-"There is no knowledge that is not power." I saw this on a Mortal Kombat arcade game. What about those pieces of knowledge that wound us beyond repair? Oddly enough, more knowledge is the often the best remedy, but, as it stands, sometimes knowledge can be kind of crippling. Doesn't mean it's not the best policy.

009: This one is useful to any city planners out there: A street sign at every real intersection is pretty ideal. Also, they should be visible from the road well before the car has passed the intersection. If they point outward, away from the intersection itself, odds are they will be harder to see. Especially if there are trees, lamp posts, or telephone poles. DO YOU HEAR ME, BALTIMORE? (Yelling intentional--couldn't contain my feelings.)

010: If you like my blog, you should let me know. I'm a sucker for positive reinforcement. If you don't like it, you should send me humorous hate mail.

Sonia, Stick to your Guns! (Serious)

I liked Sonia Sotomayor from the moment I first heard about her. It's mostly because of one of the first things about her that became widespread news was a "controversial" quip that's now been cited ad infinitum. Apparently, this quote has to be an asterisk that floats in her wake during her nomination hearings.

I was reading the Baltimore Sun during lunch today. I picked it up so I could do the crossword puzzles and the Jumble. I not only picked it up, but I paid the new outragous price of $1.06 for it. And you know what? It was a shell. A skeleton paper. All it had was the cover section. I had a pen in my hand a puzzler's mind, and now this? So what did I do? I read a news article and I scrawled notes in the margins. Why? Because I had decided that, today, I would start writing a blog. So I read the article "Court Pick Fights Back" (here--you can read it online! For free! See: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation-world/bal-te.sotomayor15jul15,0,293579.story). I actually sat there and wrote rough draft for this blog entry on top of the obituaries.

If you peek at the article, you'll see that the headline explains how the Supreme Court nominee is "fighting back" against allegations that she will bring too much race or gender bias to the court. Way-back-when, Judge Sotomayor gave a rallying cry for the underrepresented, proclaiming that "a wise Latina woman" would be better suited on the bench that a white male.

The point, at least on a surface level: The experience that comes with being a woman and a minority gives a much greater perspective for a court justice.

The counterargument: Justices are charged with interpreting the constitution, and they are therefor interpreters of the law, not empathic or subjectively independent decision makers.

So, according to this article, how is Sotomayor so scrappily fighting back her accusers? Well, apparently by indicating that her remarks were "a rhetorical flourish that fell flat," or by saying that the statement "was bad because it left the impression that I believed that life experience commanded a result in a case, but that's clearly not what I do as a judge."

Good--you've let them know that you won't be applying unfair bias. But did you miss the point that inspired your original remark? You're certainly not hitting on the part of it that is inspirational and enlightening to me. It's a nuanced position, but let's try to make sense of it.

Let's start with a question: Why might someone who has lived her life facing discrimination and bias be a good suit for the nation's highest court? Is it because of the particular political perspective it would give her? I don't think that's what she meant. Someone who has seen her own life affected by others' biases can sniff out real bias when she sees it. The honest truth is that bias works its way into peoples' perspectives--and the laws they create--in subtle ways. Someone who hasn't lived a life learning to discern subtle biases in perspectives, statements, and even laws--well, this person might quite honestly be at a disadvantage to a "wise" individual who has seen these things.

Consider this: It took a nation about sixty years to collectively wise-up and decide that "separate is inherently not equal." If, in 1896, a little bit of diversified perspective had been injected into the all-white-male court that ruled over Plessy v. Ferguson, perhaps a wiser decision could have been made. How much collective experience facing subtly dehumanizing social conditions had these upstanding gentlemen faced? I'm taking a wild guess, but I'm going to say that it was minimal. It wasn't until 1954 that Brown v. Board would clean up that mess.

Potential objection: We're all a lot less prejudiced then they were then.

My counterargument: Certain issues have gradually been integrated into our nation's comfort zone of tolerance. Would the average citizen be able to notice how a law requiring "literacy tests" as mandatory for a public service post might be subtly racist? Maybe not--but those who've struggled to master two languages in their household in addition to a job-related skill unrelated to an extensive and esoteric English vocabulary? Maybe they'd see something different.

My big take-away point: I think Ms. Sotomayor was downright inspired when she made her initial comment. She used language that is definitely alienating for anyone uncomfortable assessing their own biases or examining whether they're as lucid as they claim. Like she said, there was a "rhetorical flourish" to it. I hope she hasn't backed down on the initial notion that surely inspired the claim--the notion that our experiences facing bias can inform us on how to eliminate such instances of bias in the future. When she's officially appointed, I hope that her wisdom--which has plenty to do with life experience--is on full display.

Introduction: It's a Carnival...

What was your high school like? If possible, picture one of the hallways you frequently traversed during your ninth-grade year. There are likely rows of lockers (are they green, blue, red?) lining the walls, broken intermittently by classroom doorways. It's passing period--students are leaving class and heading toward lunch. Teachers are standing casually in the doorways. Do you have the picture? Is the schema intact?

Yes? Good, let's wreck a bit, shall we? Are the lockers neatly painted? Are they in working order? Let's take a big hammer and mess around with that bit. How's the floor? Carpeted? That's no good--tear it out, reveal the discolored tiles beneath. And what is that I'm seeing? Didn't they have spray paint where you came from? And Sharpie markers? And various etching tools? Well, take up such tool's in your mind's steady grasp and wreak some havoc, why don't you.

And the students, are they progressing in an orderly manor? Nah, they're high school kids, bound to be a bit rebellious. But wait, they're not stampeding? There isn't utter din, unbridled chaos? Better fix that--we're trying to get into the right frame of mind here.

Okay, we've got disrepair. We've got disorder. We've got utter, screaming, senseless mayhem. I think we're in essentially the same place now. We're at the undisclosed inner-city high school where I happened to teach at the undisclosed time when our story takes place. We're me. We're an English teacher, one who is paying some colleagues on the third floor a casual visit. The chaos doesn't phase us. It's part of the expected scenery.

And yet, our esteemed colleague's comment still strikes us as appropriate: "It's a carnival, Mr. Lewis!" This is what Ms. ________ shouts to us from down the hall. She strolls through the chaos. It morphs around her to make room as she walks toward us. Her smile is bright, but her eyes are glazed over with fatigue from the daily grind. And yes, what an appropriate metaphor she has provided. It's wild, full of illusions and games which we all know are rigged, and while the whole thing may be a bit of a wild ride, it's ultimately pretty expensive--possibly not worth the cost. Yep, this job is a carnival. We say as much.

"Oh, yeah, it really is, Ms. _________. I can't believe how wild it is up here." We say. We smile, and we imagine our eyes have the glaze over them, too.

"No, Mr. Lewis. It's a carnival this weekend. Up at Security. In the mall parking lot. We should all go on Friday!"

Pause. Mental pathways reconstruct themselves to allow for the functional shift. Correlation to prior experiences, mostly from our students: "It's a mouse in the room, Mr. Lewis;" "It's always somebody trying to play me, naw'saying?" Etc. Meaning found.

"Oh, there is, is there?" Emphasis added. At the time, no sarcasm. No being smart. Just reaching out a hand and finding mutual understanding.

See, as I see it, it--the greater it, namely life--is quite like a carnival. And the mirrors likely show you something other than what you first expect. You have to examine closely to figure out what's really going on. I'm tempted to prolong the metaphor, but I'm tired just thinking about it.

Oh, and we did go to the carnival at Security--a mall named for the nearby Social Security Administration--and we had a blast. Killer time.

Hope this blog is a good fun-house mirror for the world we live in. It's really just a bunch of my perceptions--and, of course, you're own interpretation of them. Maybe it'll be fun.